Prince Andrew may be innocent before actually being proven guilty.
[CAUTION: THIS POST CONTAINS CONVERSATION SURROUNDING SEXUAL ASSAULT AND RAPE]
There is a lot about the sexual assault allegations against Prince Andrew that doesn’t add up. Virginia Giuffre’s past is coming back to bite her with allegations she has lied under oath, as it’s been pointed out by Vote Watch. Before we continue, every allegation of rape and sexual abuse should be taken seriously. However, we also are not taking sides. We’d never take the side of someone who has an ego as big as Scotland (Andrew), but we will also not take the side of a proven liar (Virginia).
We are simply looking at facts as we see them. But, again, we’re not taking sides.
Lying Under Oath
According to the Vote Watch article linked above, Giuffre admitted to lying under oath in 2014 regarding so-called sexual encounters with presidents from foreign countries. Our YouTube friend Sue Smith did a video called Randy Andy which mentions a lot of what we’ve just said. Here is a sample of a transcript of questions from Virginia’s early deposition. It is from the Vote as mentioned earlier Vote Watch article.
Note the last two questions. The interviewer asks Giuffre if she could name the presidents she has ‘met’, and she says that she could name them. However, the second question asks if she could name the president, and she says she can’t remember the guy’s name. Total contradiction. Why say you can name the presidents you allegedly slept with but then say you can’t remember his name? Which is it? Can you name him, or can’t you? The same applies to the first question in the screenshot.
Giuffre is asked if she has met any foreign presidents, and she replies that she understands what is being asked of her when in reality, she doesn’t know the guy’s name. Meaning? She made it up.
Lady Colin Campbell has said in her latest video that according to her research, Giuffre said there was no sexual relationship between herself [Virginia] and Prince Andrew.
Prince Andrew: The Guy Who Said He Doesn’t Sweat
Moving over to Prince Andrew and well, royal aides fear for his credibility, according to The National. An article by The Australian newspaper says there were inconsistencies with the Duke of York’s recount of events.
(Editor’s Note: The Australian article is behind a paywall so we couldn’t access it. So we’re including it for anyone with access to the paywall.)
Moreover, the 2019 interview Andrew did didn’t help his cause. He comes across as smug and says he doesn’t sweat. Also, he doesn’t answer questions in full and tries to deflect from them.
Like Giuffre, Andrew doesn’t provide evidence to support his claims. He says he was with his daughters when Giuffre said he abused her. Where is his proof? Meanwhile, she says she has evidence of where she was. That’s great, but can you provide proof the prince was there with you?
Other Lies Giuffre Has Told
Going back to the Vote Watch article, there has been a series of lies Giuffre has told. Some of these include:
- In 1999, she claimed two male friends had raped her. An investigation spanning several months cleared the men of wrongdoing when the prosecutors refused to take the case further due to inconsistencies and Virginia’s lack of credibility.
- Another claim Giuffre made was that she was trafficked to Paris Hilton’s father and other famous people, including two presidents and a prime minister. But, again, it was discovered that this was a massive lie to garner money and attention.
- Even her earlier claims against Prince Andrew weren’t credible, even the amount of lies she had already told and the countless contradictions. She even originally stated she had met him but never slept with him.
- Another lie she had told people repeatedly was that she was a child at 17 when she was ‘trafficked’. In New York at the time (and our friend Sue mentions this in her video, which is linked above), the legal age of consent was 14 and was only raised to 17 in 2017. In the UK, the legal age of consent is 16, meaning Giuffre was an adult, not a child, regarding her ability to give consent.
Prince Andrew ‘Fights’ Back
The civil case that has been thrown at the Duke of York isn’t a criminal one but a civil one, meaning that she wants money from him. Andrew believes he hasn’t done anything wrong, which is why he denies meeting her (despite the photo) and is not caving to the pressure of giving her money.
Yes, the above photo makes Andrew look guilty, but someone who commented on Sue’s Randy Andy video made an interesting point:
In a nutshell, this commenter is saying that it’s likely the photo is being used as blackmail to make it look like something more sinister had occurred when it was something innocent. It makes sense since Prince Andrew meets thousands of people yearly, or he did before The Queen pulled him from public duties.
Giuffre thought she could get swindle money from yet another rich and powerful man by pretending to be the victim of a crime that possibly didn’t happen.
There’s So Much More
To conclude this post, we have to say that we’re not defending or condoning that something happened. As we stated earlier in the post, we’re only presenting facts as we find them. There are also many other things with this case that we haven’t included here. Do we think Prince Andrew is innocent? No. Do we believe he is guilty? No. Do we think Giuffre is telling the truth? We cannot answer that and can only go off her previous attempt to get money from the Duke of York. The attempt to claim the Duke had sex with her failed. Her lack of credibility with everything else she has said in the past works against her.
Neither Andrew nor his alleged victim has provided enough evidence to prove that they’re the ones telling the truth. Where is the proof that the Duke of York was in the same place at the same time Virginia was? Where is the evidence that he was with his daughters? Beatrice and Eugenie wouldn’t be credible witnesses if this were a criminal case because they’d be defending their father rather than being impartial.
