Is Prince Andrew Guilty As Charged… And Is Virginia Giuffre Really An Innocent Victim?editor
Normally when a jury returns a verdict, that’s the end of it. But not in the Ghislaine Maxwell case. If anything, when it comes to this extraordinary tale of power and perversion, the plot appears to be thickening.
The latest revelations come from a key witness in the recent trial, Carolyn Andriano, whose testimony helped secure four of the five guilty verdicts against Maxwell.
This weekend she gave an exclusive interview to The Mail on Sunday’s sister paper, the Daily Mail, in which she threw light on Virginia Giuffre’s allegations of battery and sexual assault against Prince Andrew.
She claims that not only did Giuffre text her excitedly from London in March 2001 to say she was having dinner with the Prince, she also claims that when she got back to Florida she showed Andriano that snap of her with him and gushed: ‘I got to sleep with him.’
According to Andriano, Giuffre didn’t seem remotely upset about the experience. On the contrary, ‘she thought it was pretty cool’ … Read more here
Never condoning sexual activity outside of marriage – a grave sin – but these days, with children in nursery school being effectively groomed by the State for future sexual activity (as long as it’s their “choice”) I’m taken aback at the alleged public outcry over this case where Prince Andrew is accused of sexual involvement with a 17 year old girl. There are very important facts reported in the above Mail Online report – information which I’ve not heard in all the TV babble in news segments for days on end. It’s reinforced my gut reaction to Giuffre’s allegations which is to query whether or not this really is a case of “trafficking” and/or “sex abuse of a minor” – or is there something else going on here?
In any event, is it fair to expect people who have been raised in a Godless environment to keep to Christian standards of sexual morality when all around them they are being brainwashed with permissiveness? Having thus brainwashed people, including those in high places, is it then right to destroy their lives by demanding those same Christian moral imperatives which “society” has long rejected? It seems clear to me: if there is no God (and by definition, a secular state is one in which Godlessness reigns, excuse the pun) then why would anyone have to abide by Christian morality – sexual or otherwise? It’s only God’s moral law which requires us to cherish sexual intercourse for the purpose He intended – marriage and procreation. Ditch that moral imperative, and anything goes. Just ask Prince Andrew.
We live in confusing times, that’s for sure. But what’s the answer unless to restore Christian sexual morality and make sex outside marriage totally socially unacceptable again. Then the Prince definitely would have a case to answer. But right now, based on society’s sexually permissive standards, does he, do you think, have a case to answer?