Page 1 of 7 1234 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 61

Thread: Prince Andrew is named in "sex slave" ring

  1. #1

    Default Prince Andrew is named in "sex slave" ring

    The Washington Post headline is "Prince Andrew named in underage sex lawsuit; Buckingham Palace says allegations are categorically untrue". Then the body of the text takes things up several levels.

    Prince Andrew was named this week in an ongoing lawsuit brought by a group of women who claim they were trafficked to the world’s rich and powerful as part of an alleged underage “sex slave” ring run by American investment banker Jeffrey Epstein.

    The allegation, found in a court filing this week, prompted Buckingham Palace to issue an unusual statement to the Guardian, noting that the allegation surfaced in “long-running and ongoing civil proceedings in the United States to which the Duke of York is not a party.” The statement continues: “As such we would not comment in detail. However, for the avoidance of doubt, any suggestion of impropriety with underage minors is categorically untrue.”

    As part of a 2008 plea deal with prosecutors, Epstein spent 13 months in prison on a state charge of soliciting prostitutes. According to unsealed documents pertaining to that deal, Epstein was the subject of a federal investigation probing allegations that the powerful figure abused dozens of underage girls at his Palm Beach mansion. The deal effectively allowed him to avoid potential federal charges stemming from the investigation.

    The lawsuit, filed in 2008 by two anonymous alleged victims, charges federal prosecutors with violating a statute by not consulting with them before finalizing the plea deal. The latest filing is a motion to expand that existing case to include the allegations of two more women.

    Those women named Prince Andrew, Alan Dershowitz and other powerful associates of Epstein as participants in the alleged sexual abuse ring. It’s the first time the Duke of York’s name has appeared in a court document alleging that he sexually abused Epstein’s alleged victims.

    But as the Guardian’s reporting makes clear, this isn’t the first time the Duke of York’s name has been linked publicly to the allegations against Epstein: Prince Andrew was friends with Epstein for years — before, during and after the banker served time in prison. In 2011, responding to a statement from one of Epstein’s former employees, Prince Andrew told Vanity Fair that he never attended any of the notorious pool parties at Epstein’s Palm Beach mansion and denied having contact with the alleged victims. He allegedly ended his friendship with Epstein at some point that year.

    In the new motion, “Jane Doe #3″ says she was “forced to have sexual relations with this Prince when she was a minor in three separate geographical locations,” including in British socialite Ghislaine Maxwell’s apartment in London; during an “orgy” on Epstein’s island in the U.S. Virgin Islands; and in New York.

    “Epstein instructed Jane Doe #3 that she was to give the Prince whatever he demanded and required Jane Doe #3 to report back to him on the details of the sexual abuse,” the document says. Maxwell is a friend of Epstein’s who is named as a co-conspirator in the suit.

    Dershowitz, too, has denied the allegations against him in the new motion. Speaking to Politico this week, the attorney said the claims were “totally, unequivocally and completely false.” Those allegations include a claim that “Deshowitz was an eye-witness to the sexual abuse of many other minors by Epstein and several of Epstein’s co-conspirators,” that “Epstein required Jane Doe #3 to have sexual relations with Dershowitz on numerous occasions,” and that the attorney played “a significant role” in negotiating Epstein’s federal plea agreement.

    Dershowitz told Politico he’s planning on filing some charges of his own in response to the allegations:
    “[I'm] planning to file disbarment charges against the two lawyers who signed this petition without even checking the manifests of airplanes or travel itineraries, et cetera,” he said. “I’m also challenging the young woman and the lawyers to level those charges against me outside of the courtroom, so that I can sue them for defamation…..Finally, I’m challenging the woman to file criminal charges against me because the filing of false criminal charges is a crime.”
    Federal prosecutors identified more than 40 potential victims in their investigation against Epstein before the federal inquiry was dropped in the plea deal. Some of those victims have reached out-of-court settlements with Epstein for undisclosed amounts.

    According to the motion, Epstein’s clients included “many other powerful men, including numerous prominent American politicians, powerful business executives, foreign presidents, a well-known Prime Minister, and other world leaders.” The alleged victim accuses Epstein of requiring the women he gave to powerful individuals to “describe the events” with them “so that he could potentially blackmail them.”

    Through her lawyers, Jane Doe #3 issued the following statement to the Guardian in response to the denials of her alleged abusers: “These types of aggressive attacks on me are exactly the reason why sexual abuse victims typically remain silent and the reason why I did for a long time. That trend should change. I’m not going to be bullied back into silence.”

    The paper reported that it knew the identity of the alleged victim, but would respect her wishes to remain anonymous in connection to the suit.
    "We'll know our disinformation campaign is complete when everything the American public believes is false." --William J. Casey, D.C.I

    "We will lead every revolution against us." --Theodore Herzl

  2. #2

    Default A hanging judge is needed

    Quote Originally Posted by Lauren Johnson View Post
    The Washington Post headline is "Prince Andrew named in underage sex lawsuit; Buckingham Palace says allegations are categorically untrue". Then the body of the text takes things up several levels.

    Prince Andrew was named this week in an ongoing lawsuit brought by a group of women who claim they were trafficked to the world’s rich and powerful as part of an alleged underage “sex slave” ring run by American investment banker Jeffrey Epstein.

    The allegation, found in a court filing this week, prompted Buckingham Palace to issue an unusual statement to the Guardian, noting that the allegation surfaced in “long-running and ongoing civil proceedings in the United States to which the Duke of York is not a party.” The statement continues: “As such we would not comment in detail. However, for the avoidance of doubt, any suggestion of impropriety with underage minors is categorically untrue.”

    As part of a 2008 plea deal with prosecutors, Epstein spent 13 months in prison on a state charge of soliciting prostitutes. According to unsealed documents pertaining to that deal, Epstein was the subject of a federal investigation probing allegations that the powerful figure abused dozens of underage girls at his Palm Beach mansion. The deal effectively allowed him to avoid potential federal charges stemming from the investigation.

    The lawsuit, filed in 2008 by two anonymous alleged victims, charges federal prosecutors with violating a statute by not consulting with them before finalizing the plea deal. The latest filing is a motion to expand that existing case to include the allegations of two more women.

    Those women named Prince Andrew, Alan Dershowitz and other powerful associates of Epstein as participants in the alleged sexual abuse ring. It’s the first time the Duke of York’s name has appeared in a court document alleging that he sexually abused Epstein’s alleged victims.

    But as the Guardian’s reporting makes clear, this isn’t the first time the Duke of York’s name has been linked publicly to the allegations against Epstein: Prince Andrew was friends with Epstein for years — before, during and after the banker served time in prison. In 2011, responding to a statement from one of Epstein’s former employees, Prince Andrew told Vanity Fair that he never attended any of the notorious pool parties at Epstein’s Palm Beach mansion and denied having contact with the alleged victims. He allegedly ended his friendship with Epstein at some point that year.

    In the new motion, “Jane Doe #3″ says she was “forced to have sexual relations with this Prince when she was a minor in three separate geographical locations,” including in British socialite Ghislaine Maxwell’s apartment in London; during an “orgy” on Epstein’s island in the U.S. Virgin Islands; and in New York.

    “Epstein instructed Jane Doe #3 that she was to give the Prince whatever he demanded and required Jane Doe #3 to report back to him on the details of the sexual abuse,” the document says. Maxwell is a friend of Epstein’s who is named as a co-conspirator in the suit.

    Dershowitz, too, has denied the allegations against him in the new motion. Speaking to Politico this week, the attorney said the claims were “totally, unequivocally and completely false.” Those allegations include a claim that “Deshowitz was an eye-witness to the sexual abuse of many other minors by Epstein and several of Epstein’s co-conspirators,” that “Epstein required Jane Doe #3 to have sexual relations with Dershowitz on numerous occasions,” and that the attorney played “a significant role” in negotiating Epstein’s federal plea agreement.

    Dershowitz told Politico he’s planning on filing some charges of his own in response to the allegations:
    “[I'm] planning to file disbarment charges against the two lawyers who signed this petition without even checking the manifests of airplanes or travel itineraries, et cetera,” he said. “I’m also challenging the young woman and the lawyers to level those charges against me outside of the courtroom, so that I can sue them for defamation…..Finally, I’m challenging the woman to file criminal charges against me because the filing of false criminal charges is a crime.”
    Federal prosecutors identified more than 40 potential victims in their investigation against Epstein before the federal inquiry was dropped in the plea deal. Some of those victims have reached out-of-court settlements with Epstein for undisclosed amounts.

    According to the motion, Epstein’s clients included “many other powerful men, including numerous prominent American politicians, powerful business executives, foreign presidents, a well-known Prime Minister, and other world leaders.” The alleged victim accuses Epstein of requiring the women he gave to powerful individuals to “describe the events” with them “so that he could potentially blackmail them.”

    Through her lawyers, Jane Doe #3 issued the following statement to the Guardian in response to the denials of her alleged abusers: “These types of aggressive attacks on me are exactly the reason why sexual abuse victims typically remain silent and the reason why I did for a long time. That trend should change. I’m not going to be bullied back into silence.”

    The paper reported that it knew the identity of the alleged victim, but would respect her wishes to remain anonymous in connection to the suit.
    The whole thing is quite outrageous, ridiculous, and, er, deplorable.

    For who among her Majesty's loyal and devout subjects has not heard the rumour that Randy is a zealous player of the "pink oboe"? A disgusting nonsense? Perhaps, but a serviceable one should the need arise.

    Still, we need have no fears for the Firm's future, particularly if we can manoeuvre the lying hussy into an English court room before she boards a Malaysian airplane, shoots herself four times in the head, or spontaneously combusts in a sordid cubicle while injecting. I have just the judge for the job. Here he is. A more representative specimen of the upper reaches of the English judiciary I have yet to find:



    Any excuse.
    "There are three sorts of conspiracy: by the people who complain, by the people who write, by the people who take action. There is nothing to fear from the first group, the two others are more dangerous; but the police have to be part of all three,"

    Joseph Fouche

  3. #3

    Default

    Now, let me see...



    Thank goodness that the prince/Buck House say in the Daily Bellylaugh's article today:

    "Prince Andrew: I Did not Sleep with Sex Slave Girl"

    That clears things up nicely, eh.

    Blowjob anyone?
    The shadow is a moral problem that challenges the whole ego-personality, for no one can become conscious of the shadow without considerable moral effort. To become conscious of it involves recognizing the dark aspects of the personality as present and real. This act is the essential condition for any kind of self-knowledge.
    Carl Jung - Aion (1951). CW 9, Part II: P.14

  4. #4

    Default

    Knowing how seriously the UK government takes rape, given their determination to get Assange to Sweeden to face charges, let alone rape of a minor, I fully expect they will have a plane ready for Andrew so he can be whisked off to the USA to assist in their inquiries.....
    "I think it would be a good idea." Mahatma Gandhi, when asked what he thought of Western civilization.

    The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it.
    Karl Marx.

    "Well, he would, wouldn't he?" Mandy Rice-Davies, 1963, replied Ms Rice Davies when the prosecuting counsel pointed out that Lord Astor denied an affair or having even met her.

  5. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magda Hassan View Post
    Knowing how seriously the UK government takes rape, given their determination to get Assange to Sweeden to face charges, let alone rape of a minor, I fully expect they will have a plane ready for Andrew so he can be whisked off to the USA to assist in their inquiries.....


    The Indy this morning is doing a really nice job on the royals and the prince as the following screenshot shows - the top two lead stories:



    This is followed by the following story:

    Prince Andrew: Aides step up defence amid further details of sex allegations



    The Duke of York strongly denies having 'had any form of sexual contact or relationship with Virginia Roberts'

    CAHAL MILMO

    Sunday 04 January 2015

    Prince Andrew was due to return to Britain on Sunday night as allegations that he had sexual relations with a teenage girl continued to swirl and Buckingham Palace issued a second denial of the claims.

    The Queen’s second son was returning from a skiing trip in Switzerland after the emergence of further details about the allegations by a woman who claims she was used as a “sex slave” by one of his friends. The claim was denied robustly by royal aides.

    The denial went further than a more limited statement issued by Buckingham Palace on Friday, following the naming of the Prince’s accuser as Virginia Roberts, who has three children and recently returned to the United States after living in Australia.
    In its second statement, the Palace said it “emphatically denied” that the Duke of York “had any form of sexual contact or relationship with Virginia Roberts”. It added: “The allegations are false and without any foundation.”
    The claims from Ms Roberts are part of a lawsuit before the American courts arising from the 2008 conviction on an underage sex charge of the multimillionaire financier Jeffrey Epstein, who is a former friend of the Duke.
    Two Sunday newspapers published further details of the claimed meetings between Ms Roberts and Andrew, who is fifth in line to the throne. The fightback by royal aides is viewed as a recognition of the potential of the claims against the Prince, who is not a party to the US case and thus has no automatic right to respond, to damage both him and the Royal Family.
    Prince Andrew: Life in pictures
    1 of 15


    In documents laid before a Florida court, Ms Roberts alleges that she slept with the Prince on three occasions – in London, New York and during an “orgy” on a private Caribbean island owned by Mr Epstein – between 1999 and 2002. The lawsuit arises from claims that a non-prosecution agreement secured on Mr Epstein’s behalf by his lawyers, which saw more serious potential federal charges against him dropped, was struck after the financier used his “social and political connections” to secure a more lenient plea bargain.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    The shadow is a moral problem that challenges the whole ego-personality, for no one can become conscious of the shadow without considerable moral effort. To become conscious of it involves recognizing the dark aspects of the personality as present and real. This act is the essential condition for any kind of self-knowledge.
    Carl Jung - Aion (1951). CW 9, Part II: P.14

  6. #6

    Default

    Never believe anything until it has been officially denied. So it goes. Well Buck house as denied it twice now. What do you reckon that means?
    "I think it would be a good idea." Mahatma Gandhi, when asked what he thought of Western civilization.

    The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it.
    Karl Marx.

    "Well, he would, wouldn't he?" Mandy Rice-Davies, 1963, replied Ms Rice Davies when the prosecuting counsel pointed out that Lord Astor denied an affair or having even met her.

  7. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magda Hassan View Post
    Never believe anything until it has been officially denied. So it goes. Well Buck house as denied it twice now. What do you reckon that means?
    It's worth reading the seedy Mail Online which has published an exclusive on this story. To be perfectly honest I can't help thinking this girl is gold digging - but not from Epstein or Prince Andrew. They are being burned to make others pay up, is my sense. I could be entirely wrong, of course, but it's her general tenor and below comment that cause me to wonder at the entire story. Maybe both men did as she said, but I still think she has an agenda:

    ‘A lot of powerful men were part of Jeffrey’s scene, but I specifically remember Andrew,’ she says.

    And:

    But she says it is now time ‘to fight’, adding: ‘When I think of what he and these other men did, it breaks my heart. I am going to name every guy who deserves to be named when I go to court.’





    The shadow is a moral problem that challenges the whole ego-personality, for no one can become conscious of the shadow without considerable moral effort. To become conscious of it involves recognizing the dark aspects of the personality as present and real. This act is the essential condition for any kind of self-knowledge.
    Carl Jung - Aion (1951). CW 9, Part II: P.14

  8. #8

    Default Westminster child abuse inquiry link to Prince Andrew paedophile associate

    Westminster child abuse inquiry link to Prince Andrew paedophile associate

    Posted on 5 January, 2015 by Undercover1
    Left: Jeffrey Epstein; right: Prince Andrew

    Over the last couple of days newspapers and the blogosphere have been awash with stories about the civil suit in the USA that includes an allegation that Prince Andrew, the Duke of York, had sex with an under-age girl – Virginia Roberts – courtesy of Jeffrey Epstein, a US business associate of the prince and a convicted paedophile. Now we can reveal that one of the names listed in Epstein’s address book was the man who oversaw the first inquiry into a Westminster paedophile ring.
    Further details are given below, together with a copy of the legal submission by the plaintiffs listed in the current case against Epstein and pdfs of exhibits submitted at his trial.
    1. The Havers connection?
    According to the legal submission Jeffrey Epstein’s phone book included 26 numbers for Prince Andrew alone. We can also reveal that Epstein’s phone book includes the contact details of Sir Michael Havers, the former British Attorney-General: this is of significance given that Havers oversaw the first inquiry into the notorious Westminster paedophile ring. Havers was Attorney General 1979-87 and has been subject to a number of allegations, including that he helped to stop the Elm Guest House investigation, tried to stop Sir Peter Hayman being named in Parliament by Geoffrey Dickens MP and tried to limit the inquiry into the Kincora boys home sex scandal. Havers’ sister, Baroness Butler-Sloss, was forced to stand down as head of another, second inquiry into child sex abuse on a wider scale, because she was seen as being “too establishment”. (For further details on the Westminster paedophile ring, see Section 4 below.)
    2. The documents and allegations
    The legal submission by the plaintiffs – each going by the name ‘Jane Doe’ – was made on 30 December 2014, resulting in the statement by the British monarchy (see Section 3 below). This is also available in pdf format.
    Here also are copies of court documents relating to Epstein’s trial: click here and here.
    In the submission to the court Virginia Roberts – listed as “Jane Doe #3” – alleges that:

    • in 1999 she was groomed as a ‘sex slave’ at the age of 15 on Epstein’s behalf by Ghislaine Maxwell (the daughter of the late and disgraced media magnate, Sir Robert Maxwell)
    • she was subsequently sex trafficked to US politicians, business executives, a ‘well-known prime minister’, foreign presidents and world leaders
    • when she was only 17 years old (in the USA the age of consent is 18) she had sex with Prince Andrew in London, New York and on an island in the Virgin Islands owned by Epstein
    • Epstein intended to blackmail those persons who participated in the sexual liaisons
    • Alan Dershowitz, Epstein’s lawyer, had sex with her on numerous occasions

    The submission further alleges that Prince Andrew used his influence on the US Government to assist Dershowitz in negotiating:

    • a low sentence for his client of 13 months (for having sex with a 14 year old girl)
    • an agreement that Epstein’s associates would be immune from prosecution (although not necessarily from being subpoenaed to appear in any future court hearing as a witness)
    • that the cases involving 40 more sex abuse victims would not be investigated further

    The plea deal negotiated for Epstein states: “If Epstein successfully fulfils all the terms of this agreement the United States also agrees that it will not institute any criminal charges against any potential co-conspirators of Epstein including but no limited to [four named individuals not including Prince Andrew or Dershowitz].” In other words if Prince Andrew is considered to be a co-conspirator he could be prevented from have to face criminal charges (though not necessarily charges raised in a civil suit).
    After Epstein was released from jail he and Prince Andrew met up and were photographed together in New York’s Central Park. However, because of his association with Epstein the Prince was forced to relinquish his role as UK trade envoy.
    3. The denials
    Over the weekend Buckingham Palace issued an uncharacteristic strongly-worded denial of any liaison between the prince and the girl. The statement initially stated that “any suggestion of impropriety with underage minors” by the duke was “categorically untrue”. In a second strongly worded statement on Saturday night, a Buckingham Palace spokesman said: “It is emphatically denied that the Duke of York had any form of sexual contact or relationship with [the woman]. The allegations made are false and without any foundation.”
    Maxwell and Dershowitz have also strongly denied all allegations.
    Whether or not Prince Andrew is required to provide evidence at court hearings involving Epstein or Virginia Roberts, Buckingham Palace may be forced into adopting more defensive measures to protect the reputation of the ‘Firm’ against these and other allegations. Which brings us back to the current inquiry into the 1970/80s London-based paedophile ring and the murder of three children…
    4. The other Royal sex scandal
    The 1970/80s paedophile ring was linked to sex orgies at the Elm Guest House and a flat at Dolphin Square. The recent, revived interest in what happened is partly a result of the matter being raised by Labour MPs Tom Watson and John Mann and is now under investigation by a department of the Metropolitan Police. Here is some background on the scandal…
    The paedophile ring was first looked into as a result of a dossier presented by the late Labour cabinet minster, Baroness Barbara Castle. The dossier alleged that Sir Keith Joseph and Sir Rhodes Boyson, other MPs, senior policemen, head teachers and clergy were involved in the ring and that there were also “links to the royal household”. Tory activist Anthony Gilberthorpe claimed he provided 40 pages of evidence about Cabinet members abusing underage boys to Margaret Thatcher and that Joseph, Boyson, Dr Alastair Smith and Michael Havers were involved. Gilberthorpe also claimed he supplied underage rent boys for private sex parties at Tory conferences and that he is willing to testify to this at any inquiry.
    After Castle had collated the dossier, she handed it to Don Hale, the respected editor of her local newspaper, the Bury Messenger. Mr Hale later claimed that a “heavy mob” of Special Branch officers raided his office and confiscated the dossier a day after paedophile Liberal MP Cyril Smith had visited him to demand he bury the story. Labour MP Geofrey Dickens later presented the Castle dossier to Tory Cabinet minister Sir Leon Brittain (who recently claimed it had been ‘lost’ by the Home Office).
    More recently the investigation moved up a gear when police were handed another dossier by MP John Mann, naming 22 individuals: these include six serving parliamentarians from an early dossier (three MPs and three members of the House of Lords), 14 Conservative politicians, 5 Labour politicians and 3 politicians from other parties. Again, two of the politicians named in this dossier are Sir Keith Joseph and Sir Rhodes Boyson.
    It is believed that the Dolphin Square flat (and possibly Elm Guest House) was the venue where three children were murdered: one boy was strangled by a Conservative MP, a second boy was murdered by two men and witnessed by another Conservative MP, and a third boy was deliberately run over by a car.
    Note… Allegations of sexual impropriety against members of the Royal Family go back decades – the most famous in recent history involving the Profumo Affair, when it was widely understood that one of those establishment figures attending sex parties organised by Lord Astor and who would arrive at the parties in an iron mask was a very senior royal. Another prominent figure attending the parties and who had sexual relationship with socialite Christine Keeler was John Profumo, Minister of War. However, Keeler was also having a sexual relationship with the Russian Naval Attache, Captain Yevgeny Ivanov. The ensuing scandal saw the prosecution of osteopath Stephen Ward – who was falsely accused of living off the immoral earnings of Keeler and her friend Mandy-Rice Davies. The subsequent trial of Ward led to his conviction. After listening to the judge’s damning summing-up, Ward allegedly took an overdose of sleeping tablets and was taken to hospital. On the next day he was found guilty in absentia of the charges relating to Keeler and Rice-Davies. Sentence was postponed until Ward was fit to appear, but a few days later he died after apparently taking an overdose (it was suggested that Ward was killed by an agent or agents acting for MI6). In the fall-out Profumo was forced to resign his post once it became clear he had lied to Parliament; not long after the Conservative Government collapsed. But the matter of the ‘senior royal’ was, some might say, conveniently ‘forgotten’. See the Profumo Affair for more.
    http://undercoverinfo.wordpress.com/...ile-associate/
    "I think it would be a good idea." Mahatma Gandhi, when asked what he thought of Western civilization.

    The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it.
    Karl Marx.

    "Well, he would, wouldn't he?" Mandy Rice-Davies, 1963, replied Ms Rice Davies when the prosecuting counsel pointed out that Lord Astor denied an affair or having even met her.

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magda Hassan View Post
    Westminster child abuse inquiry link to Prince Andrew paedophile associate

    Posted on 5 January, 2015 by Undercover1
    Left: Jeffrey Epstein; right: Prince Andrew

    Over the last couple of days newspapers and the blogosphere have been awash with stories about the civil suit in the USA that includes an allegation that Prince Andrew, the Duke of York, had sex with an under-age girl – Virginia Roberts – courtesy of Jeffrey Epstein, a US business associate of the prince and a convicted paedophile. Now we can reveal that one of the names listed in Epstein’s address book was the man who oversaw the first inquiry into a Westminster paedophile ring.
    Further details are given below, together with a copy of the legal submission by the plaintiffs listed in the current case against Epstein and pdfs of exhibits submitted at his trial.
    1. The Havers connection?
    According to the legal submission Jeffrey Epstein’s phone book included 26 numbers for Prince Andrew alone. We can also reveal that Epstein’s phone book includes the contact details of Sir Michael Havers, the former British Attorney-General: this is of significance given that Havers oversaw the first inquiry into the notorious Westminster paedophile ring. Havers was Attorney General 1979-87 and has been subject to a number of allegations, including that he helped to stop the Elm Guest House investigation, tried to stop Sir Peter Hayman being named in Parliament by Geoffrey Dickens MP and tried to limit the inquiry into the Kincora boys home sex scandal. Havers’ sister, Baroness Butler-Sloss, was forced to stand down as head of another, second inquiry into child sex abuse on a wider scale, because she was seen as being “too establishment”. (For further details on the Westminster paedophile ring, see Section 4 below.)
    2. The documents and allegations
    The legal submission by the plaintiffs – each going by the name ‘Jane Doe’ – was made on 30 December 2014, resulting in the statement by the British monarchy (see Section 3 below). This is also available in pdf format.
    Here also are copies of court documents relating to Epstein’s trial: click here and here.
    In the submission to the court Virginia Roberts – listed as “Jane Doe #3” – alleges that:

    • in 1999 she was groomed as a ‘sex slave’ at the age of 15 on Epstein’s behalf by Ghislaine Maxwell (the daughter of the late and disgraced media magnate, Sir Robert Maxwell)
    • she was subsequently sex trafficked to US politicians, business executives, a ‘well-known prime minister’, foreign presidents and world leaders
    • when she was only 17 years old (in the USA the age of consent is 18) she had sex with Prince Andrew in London, New York and on an island in the Virgin Islands owned by Epstein
    • Epstein intended to blackmail those persons who participated in the sexual liaisons
    • Alan Dershowitz, Epstein’s lawyer, had sex with her on numerous occasions

    The submission further alleges that Prince Andrew used his influence on the US Government to assist Dershowitz in negotiating:

    • a low sentence for his client of 13 months (for having sex with a 14 year old girl)
    • an agreement that Epstein’s associates would be immune from prosecution (although not necessarily from being subpoenaed to appear in any future court hearing as a witness)
    • that the cases involving 40 more sex abuse victims would not be investigated further

    The plea deal negotiated for Epstein states: “If Epstein successfully fulfils all the terms of this agreement the United States also agrees that it will not institute any criminal charges against any potential co-conspirators of Epstein including but no limited to [four named individuals not including Prince Andrew or Dershowitz].” In other words if Prince Andrew is considered to be a co-conspirator he could be prevented from have to face criminal charges (though not necessarily charges raised in a civil suit).
    After Epstein was released from jail he and Prince Andrew met up and were photographed together in New York’s Central Park. However, because of his association with Epstein the Prince was forced to relinquish his role as UK trade envoy.
    3. The denials
    Over the weekend Buckingham Palace issued an uncharacteristic strongly-worded denial of any liaison between the prince and the girl. The statement initially stated that “any suggestion of impropriety with underage minors” by the duke was “categorically untrue”. In a second strongly worded statement on Saturday night, a Buckingham Palace spokesman said: “It is emphatically denied that the Duke of York had any form of sexual contact or relationship with [the woman]. The allegations made are false and without any foundation.”
    Maxwell and Dershowitz have also strongly denied all allegations.
    Whether or not Prince Andrew is required to provide evidence at court hearings involving Epstein or Virginia Roberts, Buckingham Palace may be forced into adopting more defensive measures to protect the reputation of the ‘Firm’ against these and other allegations. Which brings us back to the current inquiry into the 1970/80s London-based paedophile ring and the murder of three children…
    4. The other Royal sex scandal
    The 1970/80s paedophile ring was linked to sex orgies at the Elm Guest House and a flat at Dolphin Square. The recent, revived interest in what happened is partly a result of the matter being raised by Labour MPs Tom Watson and John Mann and is now under investigation by a department of the Metropolitan Police. Here is some background on the scandal…
    The paedophile ring was first looked into as a result of a dossier presented by the late Labour cabinet minster, Baroness Barbara Castle. The dossier alleged that Sir Keith Joseph and Sir Rhodes Boyson, other MPs, senior policemen, head teachers and clergy were involved in the ring and that there were also “links to the royal household”. Tory activist Anthony Gilberthorpe claimed he provided 40 pages of evidence about Cabinet members abusing underage boys to Margaret Thatcher and that Joseph, Boyson, Dr Alastair Smith and Michael Havers were involved. Gilberthorpe also claimed he supplied underage rent boys for private sex parties at Tory conferences and that he is willing to testify to this at any inquiry.
    After Castle had collated the dossier, she handed it to Don Hale, the respected editor of her local newspaper, the Bury Messenger. Mr Hale later claimed that a “heavy mob” of Special Branch officers raided his office and confiscated the dossier a day after paedophile Liberal MP Cyril Smith had visited him to demand he bury the story. Labour MP Geofrey Dickens later presented the Castle dossier to Tory Cabinet minister Sir Leon Brittain (who recently claimed it had been ‘lost’ by the Home Office).
    More recently the investigation moved up a gear when police were handed another dossier by MP John Mann, naming 22 individuals: these include six serving parliamentarians from an early dossier (three MPs and three members of the House of Lords), 14 Conservative politicians, 5 Labour politicians and 3 politicians from other parties. Again, two of the politicians named in this dossier are Sir Keith Joseph and Sir Rhodes Boyson.
    It is believed that the Dolphin Square flat (and possibly Elm Guest House) was the venue where three children were murdered: one boy was strangled by a Conservative MP, a second boy was murdered by two men and witnessed by another Conservative MP, and a third boy was deliberately run over by a car.
    Note… Allegations of sexual impropriety against members of the Royal Family go back decades – the most famous in recent history involving the Profumo Affair, when it was widely understood that one of those establishment figures attending sex parties organised by Lord Astor and who would arrive at the parties in an iron mask was a very senior royal. Another prominent figure attending the parties and who had sexual relationship with socialite Christine Keeler was John Profumo, Minister of War. However, Keeler was also having a sexual relationship with the Russian Naval Attache, Captain Yevgeny Ivanov. The ensuing scandal saw the prosecution of osteopath Stephen Ward – who was falsely accused of living off the immoral earnings of Keeler and her friend Mandy-Rice Davies. The subsequent trial of Ward led to his conviction. After listening to the judge’s damning summing-up, Ward allegedly took an overdose of sleeping tablets and was taken to hospital. On the next day he was found guilty in absentia of the charges relating to Keeler and Rice-Davies. Sentence was postponed until Ward was fit to appear, but a few days later he died after apparently taking an overdose (it was suggested that Ward was killed by an agent or agents acting for MI6). In the fall-out Profumo was forced to resign his post once it became clear he had lied to Parliament; not long after the Conservative Government collapsed. But the matter of the ‘senior royal’ was, some might say, conveniently ‘forgotten’. See the Profumo Affair for more.
    http://undercoverinfo.wordpress.com/...ile-associate/
    Great find, Maggie.

    Like father, like son perhaps?

    Former Home Secretary's, Prime Ministers, Attorney Generals, other cabinet ministers AND royalty - not to mention intelligence and security chiefs, numerous Plod, judges et al.

    If the Havers allegation is true, it should rip this whole story wide open. Should but will it? What with Theresa May blocking every effort at an independent and fair inquiry I doubt it will ever happen. The state will suppress everything.
    The shadow is a moral problem that challenges the whole ego-personality, for no one can become conscious of the shadow without considerable moral effort. To become conscious of it involves recognizing the dark aspects of the personality as present and real. This act is the essential condition for any kind of self-knowledge.
    Carl Jung - Aion (1951). CW 9, Part II: P.14

  10. #10

    Default

    The more I ponder this one question arises: why would Epstein have Havers contact details in his possession? Sir Michael Havers died in 1992. There seems to be a disparity in the dates?
    The shadow is a moral problem that challenges the whole ego-personality, for no one can become conscious of the shadow without considerable moral effort. To become conscious of it involves recognizing the dark aspects of the personality as present and real. This act is the essential condition for any kind of self-knowledge.
    Carl Jung - Aion (1951). CW 9, Part II: P.14

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •