I'm not saying she wasn't abused, but since I tend to question everything I wonder why didn't she go for a criminal case. Why even allow the hint of speculation about financial motivation by seeking money (enough wealth to make you set for life)? Stick with a book deal instead and live off the residuals. But once you say you'll accept money to stop prosecuting, it never looks good.
"The bulk of her wealth came from a landmark settlement with Prince Andrew in 2022, rumored to be around $16 million, though the exact figure was never publicly confirmed."
https://houseandwhips.com/virginia-giuffre-net-worth-2025/
How is that justice? He admitted no wrong doing, but you got money to be quiet. I get it, we're all human, and some are more easily swayed by money, but not a good look.
Likely because she had as much faith in the judicial system as the rest of us have
I looked into the best "anti Virginia" allegations I could find, but this woman Lady Hervey is completely not credible. https://bigworldtale.com/lifestyle/lady-victoria-hervey-calls-virginia-roberts-a-scam-artist/
She tries to claim photos are fake while providing fake photos of her own. Makes no sense.
Because The Burdon Of Proof is lower in a Civil Lawsuit than a Criminal Prosecution.
Preponderance of Evidence VS Beyond a Reasonable Doubt.
"Can you prove Andrew Windsor had sex with you?"
"No"
"Your Honor, I rest my case"
I find the idea that years after a photo was taken someone can say "I was forced to have sex with this awful man" and that can lead to a civil conviction, disturbing.
I also do think he is guilty. But it's also possible you didn't have sex with someone you took a photo with. Maybe it was a setup. With the royal's history of engagement in this sort of thing (Jimmy Saville), I don't think so, but we are talking about guilty in a court of law. That needs to have high standards including for cash payouts.
In fact I'd rather no cash payouts for sex crimes unless there is direct medical or other bills to pay for. No get rich quick schemes, because women will abuse that.
There's also question of jurisdiction.
If this took place on private island, who has jurisdiction to prosecute?
Yes, if you're trying to prove what you also need to prove "where".
It's one of the US Virgin Islands, there is no jurisdictional doubt.
AlthoughI think the US and UK have sepcific laws about sex tourism with children to prosecute people going to Thailand etc. in their home country.
But she was 16, so legally consenting without coercion in many US states and the UK.
I imagine no actual cash changed hands for the actual sex like a regualr prostitute. Epstein turns up with what seem to be willing girls, you don't force anyone or pay directly. And if they are of legal age, where's the crime?
Face the wall
Don't shoot!! I meant legal crime, not moral, in the context of OP's question.