uk: 
 berlin. 
 x=1762953748; b= 
 m5h3voZvtnwD6z3RYm2zosWGyvH 
 Received: 
 From: martinharran@gmail.com 
  
 On Wed, 5 Nov 2025 09:16:30 +0000, The Todal  
 wrote: 
  
 >On 05/11/2025 07:15, Martin Harran wrote: 
 >> On Mon, 3 Nov 2025 11:49:10 +0000, The Todal  
 >> wrote: 
 >> 
 >>> On 03/11/2025 06:18, Norman Wells wrote: 
 >> 
 >> 
 >> [...] 
 >> 
 >>> He is experiencing very public disgrace and being virtually ostracised 
 >>> by his family. 
 >>> 
 >>> Obviously he will feel shame. Wouldn't you? He knows, and any friends of 
 >>> his will know, that there is absolutely nothing he can now say to make 
 >>> his situation any better. He may have said it in private to his family, 
 >>> but imagine if you can what the reaction would be if he issued a 
 >>> statement saying: "I did have sexual relations with That Woman. I was 
 >>> sure at the time that she was willing and keen to have sex, and I was 
 >>> sure that she was not underage in the laws of the particular US State 
 >>> where this happened". 
 >>> 
 >>> I think it would invite even more ridicule. 
 >> 
 >> People are generally more forgiving than you seem to think. If Andrew 
 >> had admitted to being a total prick (no pun intended) and expressed 
 >> regret for what he did, I think there would have been a lot less 
 >> mob-rule. The real start of his downfall wasn't Virginia Giuffre's 
 >> accusations, it was his disastrous Newsnight interview. 
 > 
 >There was a Panorama programme last night, worth watching on catch-up. 
  
 Well beyond my level of interest in this sordid affair. 
  
 >It contained an interview with Virginia Giuffre from 2019 which was 
 >widely shown at that time. 
 > 
 >She claims that Andrew abused her - implying that he was in some way 
 >brutal or sexually deviant, 
  
 I wasn't aware of her ever saying that he was in some way brutal or 
 sexually deviant, but then again, my level of interest in this is 
 nowhere near that shown by yourself. 
  
 >and of course her interviewer didn't think 
 >it polite to question her. 
 > 
 >In her now-released autobiography her story is rather different. 
  
 I wouldn't be at all surprised at inconsistency in details of 
 recollections of someone who clearly went through a very traumatic 
 time in her life. That doesn't mean that the underlying story is 
 incorrect. 
  
 >Plain, 
 >quick, vanilla sex three times, some foot-sucking by him (maybe Andrew 
 >learned that from Fergie), hardly worth mentioning in the context of the 
 >violent abuse from her own father, a family friend, Epstein and other 
 >rich millionnaires. 
  
 I guess that a key difference between us is the acceptability of a 
 middle-aged man having sex with a teenage girl supplied by a rich 
 friend, purely for sexual gratification. 
  
 > 
 >She is/was dishonest, 
  
 That seems a rather harsh judgement on someone who went through what 
 she went through. 
  
 >and has been hugely over-compensated by a 
 >badly-advised Royal Family who presumably hoped to shut her up with 
 >plenty of cash. That, if you like, was immoral behaviour by the Queen. 
 > 
 > 
 >> 
 >>> 
 >>> Or perhaps "I admit that after Epstein was convicted I did reach out to 
 >>> him in friendship. That's what is commonly done in the circles that I 
 >>> mixed with. I didn't encourage any law breaking on his part at any time 
 >>> and I now see that reaching out to him was the wrong thing to do. I 
 >>> never had the sort of public relations team that Presidents and Prime 
 >>> Minister and Kings have access to". 
 >> 
 >> Ditto 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)