I believe strongly that we should not judge or shade the children for the sins of the parents. But I also believe that there’s no getting around the fact that the headlines are absolutely terrible, and that Pippa Middleton and her husband, Terribly Moderately Wealthy James Matthews, must be devastated and embarrassed. Especially because so many of the headlines have framed this is as “Pippa Middleton’s father-in-law charged with rape of a minor.” Pippa’s father-in-law is David Matthews. He is rich and well-connected and most of the headlines about him (before now) were about how he’s a well-connected hotelier. He owns the Eden Rock hotel on St Barts. He’s being accused of raping a 15-year-old in St. Barts (and raping the same minor again in France).
Pippa Middleton‘s father-in-law has been held on suspicion of historic rapes of a minor. Millionaire hotel boss David Matthews, 74, faced court on Thursday after cops stopped him at Paris airport. The ‘attack’ is alleged to have happened on the exclusive French island of St Barts — where he owns a $7,000-a-night hotel. Multi-millionaire David Matthews, 74, has lived with wife Jane on the Caribbean retreat for more than 20 years.
He was seized by cops from France’s child protection unit at Paris Orly Airport on Tuesday over two historic rape allegations. After 48 hours in custody Mr. Matthews then appeared at the city’s Palais de Justice on Thursday and was later questioned over the alleged rape of minor.
Mr. Matthews strenuously denies all the allegations. The authorities now have six months to decide if he will be brought to trial. Mr. Matthews was released on bail, with a number of conditions which were not disclosed by French authorities. A Paris judicial official said: “I confirm that David M was placed in police custody on March 27 at the Brigade for the Protection of Minors. The Paris public prosecutor’s office opened a judicial investigation, overlooked by an examining magistrate, who charged him with the rape of a minor. He was placed under judicial supervision. The investigation alleges that the crimes were committed in 1998 and 1999. The investigations will now continue as a judicial investigation and will be led by an investigating judge.”
The swoop came as Mr. Matthews arrived in Paris on his way to the South of France. It follows a police probe which began last September. One of the alleged offences is said to have taken place in 1998 on St Barts. The other alleged attack is said to have taken place in Paris the following year.
A day later, the Daily Mail reported that the French authorities did allow Matthews to keep his passport and he has permission to return to his home in St. Barts while the investigation is ongoing and while prosecutors decide whether or not they will go to trial. As for the alleged victim, she was apparently 15 years old when the first attack happened in 1998.
The woman who claims she was raped by Pippa Middleton’s father-in-law has told French prosecutors that she was just 15 when he first attacked her. David Matthews, whose son James married Pippa last year, is currently on police bail after being arrested in Paris. He is accused of raping the woman in the late 1990s when she was a teenager. His alleged victim, now aged 34, lives in the UK but is understood to have come forward to police in Paris last year. Her mother is said to be ‘helping her with the case’.
A source close to the enquiry said: ‘The victim was just 15 at the time of the first attack, and the attacks continued.’ The first alleged assault is said to have taken place on the Caribbean island of St-Barts in 1998 and the second in Paris a year later. The source added: ‘These are the attacks investigators are focusing on. A formal complaint was made to police in 2017.’
Statute of limitations for rape cases in France is 20 years after the victim has turned 18. The victim in this case would have turned 18 in 2003. This means the case can be dealt with up until 2023.
That’s interesting that French law is so different on sex crimes than we have here in America. I still don’t believe there should be any statute of limitations on rape, but twenty years gives victims more time than most American statutes of limitations. As for the crime, alleged or not – I have no idea. I have no idea what this man is capable of. I think the timeline is interesting – she came forward in the fall of 2017, the height of the #MeToo movement, when many assault and harassment victims were coming forward and telling their stories publicly, and telling their stories to police. We’ll see.
Photos courtesy of Backgrid.
He can flee to the U.S.. Trump will take him in. Probably even give him a good spot in the WH. I think Kelly’s as good as out so he’s looking…
Orangy is short a ton of cabinet members. This guy could be whatever he wanted. Maybe even a special office that investigates how to stop fake accusations of rape. (Of course when I say fake I mean real).
This made me lol but then I stopped myself once I realized nothing is too crazy to come true under Trump.
Right? Same. You just never know with this guy, anything can happen.
I just read that he’s hiring his golf caddy to take hope hicks place! Omg
Indeed. It’s sounds rather Trumpian, doesn’t it?
Maybe we should ask Boris Epstyn, Felix Sater and Alan Dershowitz if they have any comment.
I will wait.
And Prince Andrew can be the liaison.
Wow, I saw the headline that he had been arrested, but I didn’t read what for. That has to be devastating for their family, but even more so for the victim who has carried this for so long. I have to think her case is pretty compelling, for them to make an arrest 20 years later? I’m glad she found the strength to come forward. If there are others, I hope they can come forward as well.
I feel horrible for the poor victim of this man. He sounds like a monster.
He is a disgusting monster.
To think Carole banished her brother GG from the reception because of his video past but there was a worse monster inside , This man was around young kids at Pippas wedding, including Charlotte and George.
Pippa went digging for gold , wanting to marry well on Mums dream for her daughters and got Devils gold.
IMO She never looked as happy with James Matthews as she did with the former boyfriend, the cricket player , forget his name.
I think Mummy Carole helped push this marriage along, convinced by the money and lifestyle it would bring to Pippa.
Now this mess and IMO it will taint Pippa social cache in some circles.
Also I can only imagine the Celebrities and moneyed clients who usually like quiet , low key, private trips to Eden Roc, not wanting to go there after this current horrific , disgusting news about its owner.
There’s really no need to criticize Pippa in this situation. Not only did she not know these people then, but she was a teenager herself. And suggesting she doesn’t love her husband and is a social climber who got “devils gold” is BEYOND rude.
I hope Pippa and James lean on each other through this and their marriage makes it through. And I hope his father pays for his crimes.
Pippa is innocent in all this. Why go after her? Cos she married a rich dude? And even he is innocent, so this is just trashing her for no reason.
As for that old creep, hope there’s a case. Cos it’s been 20 years… So he could get away…sad.
While I realize putting Pip’s name in the headline is to draw attention (who would really know who Matthews is outside of UK?), t is SO WRONG to draw Pippa into this. If this is true, this is on HER FATHER IN LAW, NOT HER. WOMEN NEED TO STOP BEING BLAMED FOR MEN’S BEHAVIOR(S)!!
It really kind of ticks me off to read, in here especially, where I thought those of us that post on a bit more “enlightened”, that people are almost clucking in glee saying Pippa is basically getting what she/Carole “deserve” for “gold-digging”. FFS!!
@imqrious2….I completely and totally agree! This is what grabbed my attention also. Well said
do you think Pippa’s hubby James Matthews knew about this?
@imqrious2. Agreed. And I don’t even like Pippa but this has absolutely nothing to do with her.
Whatever reasons Pippa had for marrying Terribly Moderately Wealthy James, this situation has nothing to do with her.
@Runcmc, I agree with everything you said.
First of all, he hasn’t been convicted. Do you know what “alleged” means? Secondly, to presume that Pippa didn’t marry for love is moot – it has nothing to do with her father-in-law. She and James look happy and they should be left out of any and all comments about David Matthews.
If it is true that it was his niece, she was probably at Pippa’s wedding as well. It is so sad all around.
Sorry, no dice, pippa is involved. It’s just the way it goes. The father in law is her family now, whether ahe likes it or not, I swear the Matthew’s family is trashy. The brother was a coke head on a reality show and now the father is potentially a peado.
@Aurelia
Please kindly explain to me how she is involved in the rape of this girl.
This is horrific. I read the story yesterday and felt ill. I believe France is also upping their age of consent or something along those lines (someone correct me if wrong).
And yea their statute is better than ours. There’s should be no limitation on rape, child rape, molestation, etc. But heck I would like for us to be better at prosecuting these cases first
The new law (or proposed law if it hasn’t passed yet) sets the age of consent at 15, therefore anyone younger regardless of consent or not, would be a case of statuatory rape. The law up until now has been that sex with a minor under 15 years old is criminalized, but only if it the act was forced.
As this girl was 15 at the time, neither of those would actually apply from an age being a factor point of view. So, she’s flat out accused him of rape, the no consent, no is supposed to mean no kind.
Gotcha thank you. I could not remember all the specifics. Odd though because here children cannot “consent” ever. So weird discrepancy there
@Nicole: the law that was/might still be in place did not have provisions for what we consider statuatory rape. There were 2 recent cases where men, one 28 and the other 30, had sex with 11 year olds. One was acquitted of rape because the way the law was worded required the prosecutors to prove “coercion, violence, threat or surprise” (surprise being for example, being asleep, passed out, too intoxicated to protest). Without that, it’s still a misdemeanor but it’s not rape and the penalties are very different. This why they are looking to set an age under which, the child is not considered able to give consent.
Articles on this in French speak about “rape of a minor by a person having authority over the victim” and a closer look shows that the under 15 age limit does not apply in that case, just to correct what I said above about the 15 year old thing.
And while I was reading up on these laws, it occured to me that the wife of the current French President would also have fallen squarely in that definition, although I believe that the 20 year time limit has passed on that.
Okay yes I remember that case. You are correct. Thanks for the clarification but geez horrifying laws
If the victim is his niece, as some places are reporting, well then I don’t see consent being at play here.
This is sad. I feel so awful for the minor, as well as the TMW James and Pippa. That must be genuinely horrible to deal with. Not nearly as awful as assault, but still not a pleasant thing to deal with and process.
I feel sorry for Pippa that the media has so cynically put her at the centre of this story when it has eff all to do with her.
Co-sign
Nope nope nope. Pippa has put herself in the media’ s spotlight by calling the paps on herself a million times, hiring a pr person to roll out her wedding, papping herself on her honeymoon, pursuing a carreer in television etc etc etc. The other day, the fail had pics of her walking her dogs, and described her as a “royal” beauty. She, and her mother, have presented themselves as de facto members of the Royal Family. If hey didn’t want scrutiny or headlines they could have retired to Bucklebury and demanded privacy. They wanted to be famous, to be royal. I’m sorry for that girl and her trauma but Pippa earned these headlines.
I’m of two minds on this. One, Pippa didn’t rape anyone, so it’s unfortunate to see her name dragged into things. However, she herself really pushed her marriage with pap walks, press stories, and the day of photo ops with her little tiara. If she hadn’t tried to make her marriage and herself such a “thing” the headlines would probably be kinder to her.
Pippa and Carole did not rape anyone. Men should be held accountable for their own actions. Women should not be blamed for being related to those men.
She stuck between a rock and a hard place. She and her family have courted media attention for many years, they have built their ‘celebrity’ on association with others in the public eye. Even though this is naught to do with her, she’s still associated with it by marriage.
I fear that their is more to this story that am sure will come out in the wash. It happened twice.
Ugh…this sounds suspiciously like the she asked for it defense. It’s gross.
There was a definate thawing of coverage surrounding Kim Kardashian after the robbery incident because even us die hard gossip snarkers were able to draw the line between “she opened her entire world for consumption” and “damn, this is real and someone was truly hurt”. THIS is not the cross I want to throw myself on so that I can laugh at Pippa Matthews. Gross.
**Can we please also be respectful enough to refer to these women by their names.
Even if she hadn’t sought publicity, I think the media would still be putting her at the centre of it. She has the maiden last name that puts the story on the front pages.
There was a relative of Ethel Skakel’s family (the wife of Bobby Kennedy) who allegedly murdered someone, and for some reason the Kennedy name is always cited in the story even though I think the dude is only related through some kind of in-law relationship. Any time I watch a documentary on that murder and the actual connections are traced, I’m like “Wait a second, that guy isn’t really a Kennedy!”
Anyway, Pippa has nothing to do with any of this, and I’m assuming other people share the same opinion.
That’s just gross, Red Snapper. She didn’t rape anyone. Climbing may be tacky, but rape is disgusting and the sole responsibility of the rapist, no one else.
@perplexed
RFK Jr wrote a book about the case and has been in the media defending his cousin, so even though Michael Skakel is not a Kennedy, he is close enough that some defended him.
Oh, fair enough. I didn’t know that RFK Jr. wrote a book. That does change things. I just vaguely remember watching a movie about it starring the guy from Law and Order as Detective Fuhrman (the same guy from the OJ case), , and that’s how I became aware of the case. Then I started watching a few documentaries. And my reaction at those times was always kind of the same — “wait, he doesn’t actually have Kennedy blood.”
I’m not saying their name needs to be disassociated from this particular case, however, and it appears that RFK Jr. doesn’t mind the association. I’m just saying what my initial reaction has generally been — maybe a little annoyance into being misled that he might have had Kennedy blood.
My reaction to Pippa is more extreme than that, which is the following: there’s no way she could have known that her father-in-law raped a 15 year old in 1998. She has zero connection to this kind of crime as far as I’m concerned.
It doesn’t matter how many times Pippa is photographed, she is not responsible for the actions of her father in law. Putting her face at the center implies otherwise.
Even if Pippa never courted attention she would still be dragged into this by the media. She’s Kate’s sister so she is more interesting to people than the matthews family alone – she was always gonna be tagged in this. She’s been quiet anyway lately.
Pippa earned headlines of some man she didnt know 20 years ago raping a 15 year old? Wow. That is a stretch.
@Perplexed – I’m old enough to remember everything about Michael Skakel (Ethel Kennedy’s nephew). Martha Moxley, a friend of Skakel’s, was beaten to death with a golf club in 1975. His brother was initially questioned by police but let go. Michael Skakel was convicted of drunk driving in 1978 – he had pretty bad addiction issues at the time – but his family worked out a deal where he went into rehab (the Kennedy connection…). In 1998 a couple of books were published that showed definite evidence that Michael Skakel murdered Moxley and that same year an investigation was reopened into her death. Skakel was arrested in 2000 and in 2002 sentenced to 20 years to life. Skakel’s lawyers have been filing appeals ever since and he was paroled in 2013 but has to wear a tracking device and report regularly to a bail commissioner. There was a really good documentary on TV some years ago about it, he’s unquestionably guilty but the family threw all the weight of the Kennedys behind him, hence decades of legal wrangling.
I think we need to start looking at why there’s this idea that women who pursue fame or make themselves visible have ‘earned’ some type of punishment in the first place. Especially a gross punishment like this one.
Nope nope nope. Red Snapper, your comment is revolting. It is ALWAYS out of line to blame an innocent woman for a man’s sex crimes.
Unless you have some kind of proof that a person was actually involved with enabling or covering up a crime, you shouldn’t fling accusations and guilt.
Theres already a lot of pushback, but I’m with others on this. Also of 2 minds.
This story is bigger because of Pippa. Pippa did promote tf out of this family and her association. It was shopped out. And while she has absolutely nothing to do with this rape this is an issue because of how she capitalized on her marriage. It’s like closing floodgates.
@otaku fairy You make an excellent point. Red Snapper’s argument is taking a common trope from gossip comments and applying it in this perverse way. Sure, I think it is fair game to critique the way celebs do e.g. pap strolls, because they are self-consciously performing them in a public sphere. But to criticize the very fact that they are doing these stunts is starting to become problematic IMO (wouldn’t you do everything you could to ensure the success of your career/personal brand/income?). Taking it even further, to say that because celebrities – however defined – exist in the public sphere it means that they have invited all the conversations had about them is, frankly, grotesque. This all reminds me of the discourses surrounding the iCloud leak.
Ada and fairy,
Speaking for myself here.
I agree with the general statement, but not in context of this. Pippa did leak out and pap stroll her details of wedding diet, clothes, workouts, party tips, honeymoon, wedding details. Clothes. They knew where to be. Had friendly and inviting subjects. Had details like an insider. Pippa did seek this attention. She profited on it. What is unfortunate is the association.
Like kathy Griffin promoted her clothing line, but unknown to her it was linked by a sweatshop. Did she know? No. Did she make sure her name was all over that? Yea. Was it unfortunate? Yea.
The connection isn’t made up. And yea she profited on her exposure to her finance and his family
@FLORC I understand if you dislike the excessive exposure, and that’s fine – a matter of taste. I guess I just don’t see it as morally problematic. There was a demand for her wedding stories and she realized she could profit from that. Maybe tacky but hardly unethical.
I don’t think the parallel to Kathy Griffin holds up. KG went into branding clothes and it was her responsibility to vet the process of actual clothes-making (though of course one cannot fault her for the choice of sweatshop labor directly). In this case, though, all Pippa did was get married rich. Neither marriage nor wealth was built on rape, nor is it expected of her to make sure that no such crime occurred in the family she married into. What would that kind of process look like?
Of course, tabloids are going to big up the connection with the Middletons, but they would have done this regardless of the kind of exposure Pippa allowed for the nuptials. Nobody is denying her connection with the family (?), but that she “earned” headlines linking her with a rapist because she pap strolled with her dogs? Really? There is a kind of vitriolic schadenfreude in Red Snapper’s comment that worries me.
The media never hesitates to blame a man’s horrific actions on a woman!
I don’t think they are blaming Pippa. It’s just Pippa is the celebrity because of her sister. It’s all just click bait but I don’t think it’s blaming Pippa. If James (is that his name? I don’t remember) was the famous one, his name would be everywhere.
@Margo, agree. If the headline had been “David Matthews accused of raping a minor”. Who? If the headline had been “Spencer Matthew’s dad accused of raping a minor”. Ok, I guess in the UK he is well-known. But “Pippa’s father-in-law”, then the readership will increase a huge amount.
@Annabelle Bronstein i don’t see anyone blaming pippa for her father-in-law’s actions a decade+ before she met him when she was just a teen herself. that doesn’t make any sense.
it’s unfortunate but having dodgy relatives making headlines is nothing new for public figures. look at uncle gary, after all! the middleton clan has dealt with this before. of course the media will mention pippa – it’s because she is a public figure and “pippa middleton’s father-in-law” makes a better headline than “owner of eden rock.”
Of course the Press is going to put her name in the story It’s HER FATHER IN LAW!
I find it interesting hardly anyone complains when Pippas name is all up in any story about Royals or Royal in laws, but now they complain about this in law. The Middletons are related to the royal family the same way they are related to the man.
So if she and the Middletons love the good Royal in law press they get, they have to deal with the scandalous in-law press they get too. They can’t pick and choose which in laws the press will associate them with.
Middletons have been front and center in press for ages, even doing a photo call after the royal wedding and hiring PR people for various things, Pippas wedding, eg. So Live by the press sword, so get tainted by the same press sword, they can’t pick and choose.
I feel sorry for the victim of this disgusting man.
The press put her name in it because they love when they can connect something salacious to the royals. A better headline would have been, “Reality TV Star Spencer Matthews Father …”
@Megan but americans don’t recognize the name spencer matthews, and pippa tried very hard to make herself known in america, so mentioning pippa over spencer = more click$ due to a wider audience (UK and america).
Yeah, it’s a bit gross. Of course the headlines will put her name in there because otherwise why would the public care about this particular man committing crimes? But she didn’t do anything wrong, nor would I expect her to even know about it. I don’t think her media fame-whoring means she “deserves” this. She’s been annoying and clearly desperate for a similar level of fame and recognition as her sister, but that doesn’t mean she deserves to be front and center in the story of a MAN’S crimes. Yes, she’s related by marriage and naturally her name will be in there, but let’s focus on the MAN who did these terrible things. I’m tired of women being side-eyed and judged based on their male relations, especially male relations they have zero control over.
The man is a monster. I hope he gets jail time. What he did is horrific.
…but for anyone to think the Midletons and Pippa will get Only the good press of in-law association and not the bad press of in-law association, is being naive.
The press doesn’t work that way.
The press will do what they will and use the prominent name.
No one can stop press from using her name because it’s a negative story and it is her father in law. Taint by association is how press works sometimes.
Maybe I’m off base here, but my thought is that this may have only ever gotten to arrest stage because its association with the royal family means the public will pay attention to the case and evidence, and also be there to hold investigators accountable. Otherwise, it would have likely just resulted in another powerful, rich white dude intimidating/buying his way out of trouble. Outrage is a powerful tool for police, potentially.
Very unlikely. The last time Pippa was in trouble in France, it was quickly hushed up and case closed.
When WK had their court case heard, it was swiftly concluded without any publicity.
Why would France pay more attention to someone with an extremely tenuous link to the royal family? Someone no one in Britain, nevermind France, can pick out of a lineup?
Quite possibly. Based on replies below, I understand the victim might have been related to him, which is another horrifying layer that likely made the case more urgent.
He fits right in with Pippa’s uncle Gary and his Maison de Bang Bang. I doubt they’re embarrassed. Probably outraged. Entitled folks like these expect to be left alone and resent their behavior being judged. I can see them blaming the victim and courts and laws and the media more than being humiliated. This family has kept its secrets. That’s over now.
My bet? They’ll blame Pippa for the scrutiny. Divorce by next year.
If James blames Pippa, then divorcing him will be better for her. Who needs to be married to someone who blames you for the actions of their father ?
They can’t as the Mathews family has been in the public eye long before Pips came on the scene because of their reality TV show star son Spencer and his fame ho ways.
Am no fan of Pippa but any scrutiny on this family, past and present, is not on her.
@Rapunzel Of course the family is humiliated and no doubt heartbroken and feeling extremely betrayed and confused. Have a little compassion for his wife and kids. I can’t begin to imagine what they are going through.
To suggest that Pippa “earned” these headlines is disgusting.
I’m not at all suggesting Pippa deserved or earned the story. She’s totally innocent. But I’m not about to assume this family feels humiliated, either. They probably side with the accused and believe he’s innocent and that this is an unfair witch hunt. This is a common reaction. You’re assuming humiliation because you believe they believe the victim. I assume they don’t.
@Rapunzel: I get what you’re saying because most people would have a hard time coming to terms with the fact that a relative would do something like this. But the fact that it seems to be a family member saying he did this to her probably makes a difference too. It probably is humiliating.
“Have a little compassion for his wife and kids” – Well I think that Rapunzel’s idea of them acting all entitled and blaming the victim seems pretty realistic. Of course one can stand corrected, if the family of the abuser expresses sympathy for his victim. If they do that they will get compassion.
@Sarah We have no idea how the family is reacting. You are making broad assumptions about people you have never met because of your bias against wealth. I would expect his wife and children to reserve their judgement about his guilt until they see the evidence, as most of us would if our father was arrested for rape.
Megan- you expect the family to reserve judgement? If your father was accused, you wouldn’t believe him? I think that’s unrealistic to expect. Unless they know something, they’re likely gonna think he’s innocent and support him. That’s natural. And when you add in wealth an privilege, it’s logical to expect that this family would be pissed at dirty laundry being aired, even if they did think dad was guilty.
Plus, even if they aren’t outraged or defensive about this, why should they feel humiliated if they did nothing wrong? I’m sympathetic, but they don’t need to be considered pathetic to earn that.
When I looked at the dates of the alleged attacks, I thought how the hell can anyone defend or prosecute effectively when so much time has gone by? And the French authorities have six months to decide IF they will take the case forward to trial. I will never understand the French legal system (Napoleonic Code). It’s very different from the Anglo-American system.
Horrific story and am sure it won’t be the last story about someone with power who’s victim is/was empowered by the MeToo and TimesUp movement to come forward.
Am not sure about French law but if he is prosecuted and found guilty he won’t get off lightly. For him to even be arrested there has to be compelling evidence.
I can imagine Carole is spitting nails over this, first her brother and now her very wealthy in law. The Middleton’s are fast becoming quite the social pariah’s with these kind of connections/scandals.
No, I don’t think the Middletons are becoming social pariahs and Carole is just fine. The wealthy have a different set of rules. You could see it clearly with the OJ Simpson story. It’s terribly unfair.
OJ was shunned by his wealthy neighbours and country club buddies after he was aquitted (although perhaps if he had been white he wouldn’t have been?)
Mariposa, I’ve often wondered about that.
Yes the elite have a different set of rules, if any.
Otherwise Andrew, Queen’s son would have alot to answer for.
OJ actually committed the murder though.
In this case, the father-in-law would have to be shunned, but not the Middletons (they didn’t rape anybody).
And where is OJ now? Hanging out in Vegas, dating, playing golf etc…and living off his untouchable NFL Pension while the Goldman family is fuming. Yes, the elite of the world have a different set of rules no matter their skin colour. And again, it’s terribly unfair.
@perplexed
OJ was acquitted so in the eyes of the law is he is innocent. That has always been the problem. We may think he did it. But he was acquitted. Like Condit in the Chandra Levy case, everyone thought he was guilty until it was discovered otherwise.
But our laws are unfair and insufficient every single day. OJ’s case gets way too much attention compared to cases involving police shootings, rape, murders of trans people, homeless people, undocumented immigrants, etc. OJ’s case went to trial when so many don’t even get an investigation. His verdict is what it is. No more egregious than anyone else’s.
The obsession with his case is over the top. Not saying you but in general.
Matthews’ actions are not a Middleton scandal.
I think the Middletons will be Williams undoing or possible downfall
Their constant need for social cache and gold digging , yes I think the Middletons are gold diggers )might be the undoing of them.
What did the Middletons do in this particular case? Nothing. So if people use them as an excuse, then they really just wanted to bring down William or the Monarchy in general without anything that the Middletons did.
Ghelge, the Middletons are going to bring William down? No, William is going to bring William down, as well as his own trashy family. Uncle Andrew, who is still supported by the Queen and has not been kept away from any public events, is the same kind of pervert as Pippa’s father in law.
No need to be so nasty ghelge. They have nothing to do with this. Maybe instead of directing so much anger and hate toward them you should direct it at the person who raped a child twice.
The Middletons have nothing to do with this issue and William has a very close relationship with them. If anything they support William completely. If anyone brings the family down it will be William and his work-shy ways or his philandering. In any event, David Matthews’ alleged crime is the issue here and his family will have to deal with it on their own. Leave Pippa out of it, she did not shill for any of this attention.
Ghegle is a malicious troll. Best to ignore.
I think malicious is a bit strong. She’s got an opinion, and I agree with the basis of it — they are targets because of their media visibility and they create clicks and money for the media — but the rest might be going a bit far.
In a – rueful – way, it’s somewhat comforting to see people coming forward thanks to the empowering energy of the #MeToo movement. We can’t change the past and stop the crimes from happening, but we can keep up the pressure to insure that victims have justice.
Good on the lady that she spoke up without fearing the quasi-royal connections. I hope the palace stays well out of it and doesn’t try to bury this story in the press.
The Middletons aren’t responsible for this crime. And I doubt they’ll be social pariahs because of this – Prince Andrew wasn’t even dinged for his Epstein connection.
The Queen made absolutely sure Andrew wasn’t dinged for his Epstein association. She had that story pulled within 3days of it breaking and any criminal / civil charges going down in Florida (or wherever the case was) closed down as far as Andrew was concerned.
It was amazing to watch in real time because it was a demonstration of her power which most people assume she doesn’t have. Obviously not for the victim(s).
These days when the story pops up, it’s doesn’t mention Andrew, even though it’s searchable online in old articles from the 3 days it ran. As the public have long memories, they bring the association up in the comments, but the media do not.
The Epstein scandal was actually when I started to revise my opinion of the Queen. She has a hell lot more power than I tought, too bad she does not want to use it for the good. But the, given the kind of institution she represents…
Funny you guys mentioned the Epstein/Prince Andrew/Dershowitz scandals, because that’s exactly what this reminded me of. Unfortunately, I can easily imagine this dude getting out of any serious consequences like all those monsters (and many others) did too.
Edit – there’s a good archived Gawker article that goes over everything in that case.
I don’t think HM had that much impact on the Epstein scandal. I think he had leverage over a lot of politicians in the US. He was able to plead out on a relatively minor charge and got 13 months in jail. Not much for a man trafficking teen age girls.
Meghan: I’m not saying HM affected the case as far as it concerned Epstein. I am saying that she affected those parts that dealt with Andrew.
When the story broke in the UK, it was framed the same way this story is being framed around Pippa. HM shut that down sharpish.
Further, BP reached out to the court and had the accusation against Andrew withdrawn from the overall charge against Epstein.
BP very publicly made it known that whatever was being charged to Epstein had nothing to do with Andrew and he was not a suspect nor was he expected to be.
The entire conversation was shut down as far as op-ed pieces and mainstream media that discussed Andrew in the Epstein case.That has remained the line.
Finally she very publicly gave Andrew an award whose main purpose was to demonstrate to interested parties that she was standing by Andrew and willing to bat for him. Everyone backed off.
As for how Epstein handled his court case and conviction, i agree that he had many politicians in his pockets and that went some way in the outcome of his case, but it was achieved without Andrew.
I remember prince chuck was appalled the queen gave andy another free pass.
If we don’t blame Meghan for the actions of her crazy family, why do we blame Pippa and Carole?
Fair is fair.
Wasn’t the accuser his niece? If true this is unspeakably evil.
I read an article saying the victim was his niece as well. Sickening
I too read it was a niece, but no major outlet has reported it so IDK if it’s true. That would explain why he was able to attack her more than once.
The major outlets may be trying to protect her identity. Once they declare her his niece, it will probably out her identity. I think the rule is that a victim should not be identified against her will.
The charges were “rape of a minor by a person having authority over the victim”. That definitely means an ongoing presence in the victim’s life. That’s the sort of charge that would be levelled against a child’s teacher, priest, family doctor, family member, someone they feel they have to listen to or obey. It implies that there is a relationship involving trust in some way that was taken advantage of.
I think the French media was reporting as such but in the UK the rules about victim identification are tighter and this has not been included.
I think girl he;s accused of raping will turn out to be a staff members child. She was probably paid off to shut up but now in this new speak up climate shes not scared anymore.
And i’m counting 5,4.3.2,1 .. more accusers could come forward.
I did read (in one of the first stories) that it was someone close to him.
Yes, that is the word.
I hope Pippa gets away from these people. I am sorry, but they are bad news. The rumors about them have been there, but no reporters said anything. David is skeevy, and NO one in St Barths is surprised. The sons acted unkindly to the locals and are arrogant, entitled a-holes. Plus the other stuff I said before.
If a reporter digs, this is just the beginning. Floods of stories about them are out there.
Pippa’s courting of the press has a downside. It always does. None of this is her fault. At all. I feel sorry for her because in every article in the future this may or may not be mentioned. It would have been a headline but not nearly this big and covered globally.
She should cut her losses now and get away from this sleazy family. I definitely wouldn’t want to bring children into it.
Poor Pips. She may be a lot of things but she certainly never deserved this kind of humiliation. And it is for her no matter that she is innocent.
Wow, that is interesting. I would be very interested to get the feeling from St Barts…obviously its a small place where he has lived for years, so I’m sure people on the ground there would have a good feel for whether he is guilty.
Yes very interesting, @ Magniolarose.
You certainly know more about this family than probably most of us on this site. Does that mean that, all this time when we were told, that Pippa was happily married, she was aware of what was going to come out regarding David, and her seemingly pleasant hubby is really a very unpleasant man? They sure had me fooled.
I am sure Pippa knew nothing about them because St. Barths wasn’t her stomping grounds and no one ever says anything directly to anyone’s face. It is always behind the scenes whispering or just a comment in a conversation. I am not sure a lot of their behavior is known in the UK. They aren’t really on the scene socialites, and their UK base is in Scotland.
St. Barths has a “ruling” class who have no interest in bringing any negative attention to the island. It is basically a handful of families that insist that any issues or problems be taken care of without publicity. By keeping it exclusive, it is effortless to keep problems quiet and handled privately. It doesn’t mean that there aren’t scandals it just means they are never publicized.
One of the things about the Matthews family is that they don’t really have a lot of public defenders. Not loads of friendly good natured stories, anecdotes or claims they are beloved on the island. They have been there quite a long time, and their hotel is top flight.
There was some image clean up done once MWJ hooked up with Pippa, on her side too but if someone wants to talk about their reputation they could. Spencer isn’t just anomaly he is business as usual.
They wanted a social leg up too, and rumor is their aspirations to climb make Carole look like amateur hour. They aren’t aristocrats. David is from humble beginnings, I think working class but worked his way to where he is now. They wanted the connection perhaps more than Pippa did.
Another clue about them was who came to the wedding. All those superstars and wealthy people that go to St Barths, where MWJ spent a lot of time, and none went to the wedding. The guest list was not very impressive. I do wonder what David M’s partner is thinking right now. This isn’t good for business that is for sure.
Damn. She finally finds a husband and turns out is dad is a pedo. Poor pippa.
But most importantly that poor woman who had to deal with being raped at 15 by that monster. I agree with a previous poster. She must have a pretty compelling case for them to arrest him 20 years later. I believe her!
Her father in Law is disgusting.
“She finally finds a husband”??? Margo S – please explain
Pippa was on the look out for a rich husband, but none of the aristocracy was interested, so she had to settle for this guy.
I feel sorry for the victim. Although I have no love for Pippa, I feel sorry for her too. It’s not her fault, but her name has been dragged into the headlines. Our media is sick sometimes. :/
I agree with you.
I don’t like the way this story is told: “Pippa father in law” is repeated all the time. Only because she is a “name” more than he is.
It is her father IN LAW. The press is accurate.
No one complains when the Middletons are constantly mentioned alongside Royal In Laws in stories , so I don’t feel sorry for Pippa now? I feel sorry for the poor victim of this Monster.
The Middletons can’t pick and choose which in laws the press will associate them with. The Middletons and Pippa played the press game forever, so now they can’t control it when it’s bad press and not good press.
@Ghelge His SON is a reality TV star who is featured in the tabs far more frequently than Pippa. Given his son’s direct connection, if the tabs need to drag someone for David Matthews’ crimes, Spencer seems like the obvious choice.
If you think no one is complaining when the Midds are mentioned in royal stories, you know very little about the Midds.
@Megan this story was at the top of the daily mail’s US section all Friday and Saturday. It wouldn’t have been there with a headline about Spencer Matthews. They go with the biggest name they can for the most recognition worldwide, not just limited to one region. So the UK will know Spencer, but they won’t get any attention from the US with that name. Use Pippa’s name and you get much more exposure.
Ditto. One news outlet even mentioned KM as her sister in the first sentence of their article. This an ugly, six-degrees of separation mess.
This. First and foremost, my sympathy is with the victims in all of the #Metoo stories. But I can’t help but feel sorry for those whose male relatives are turning out to have been creeps too.
It doesn’t matter they dodnt do it. It’s what happens now . Does pippa bring the kids around grandpa? Her future ones , their cousins? They cut out Gary for a video. Pippa is probably being instructed to get as much money and get out.
@Jono that is exactly where my mind went as well. If Pippa and James were older and had grown children, it wouldn’t be as much of an issue. IMO
That said, I hope Pippa & James make it through this and their marriage is okay.
I don’t. I hope Pippa gets away from him and moves on. He’s no prize. I mentioned it here a few weeks ago.
I didn’t mean for that to come out so bluntly. I was rush posting. Sorry about that.
This story makes me mad. Mostly for the victim. To live with this horror for so long must have been a nightmare.
Illinois has the same SOL as France for Sex crimes. I really don’t have anything else of value to add here.
7000 dollars a night?
Vive la révolution!
#EatTheRich
If true, this is disgusting!!! Would it have made the headlines if there was no Pippa association?
If the woman he is pictured with is his son’s mother & Pippa’s mother-in-law, man, she looks younger than the son!!!
Well it would have made the headlines since his other son is a loud, boorish, fame-whorish RTV ‘star’ regularly in the tabloid news (Hello, OK, the Mail etc), as is his equally media hungry girlfriend.
Exactly. He helps the story have more impact and interest. You have him and his attention seeking slimy ways and now the father with very accusations. Other than murder, rape of a minor relative is the worst it can get.
You have James’ hedge fund investigated for shady dealings, the father and disgusting Spencer and his thirsty girlfriend.
Probably as he is very wealthy and connected within British upper classes plus his son is a reality TV star. It gets more clicks if u push the royal connection.
Yes, that is Pippa’s MIL. She looks younger than her own son, James.
She looks a lot like Pippa, IMO.
Why the need to stick these sex crimes to some woman, somewhere? It’s getting exhausting.
First of all, I agree that this is awful. Of course it is. If guilty I have not one ounce of sympathy for him; I only sympathize with his victim, her family, and lastly, his family. But I almost couldn’t read the whole article because I got stuck at the fact that his hotel charges seven thousand dollars a night. Seven thousand? What do you get for , excuse me, SEVEN THOUSAND DOLLARS A NIGHT? I’m assuming youth treatments with I.V.s of angel tears and unicorn blood.
I think you get the satisfaction of knowing the only other people there are the world’s rich and famous, and when they see you they know you are too.
I think you get the security of frolicking on the beach in your bikini without paps taking pictures of your lumpy a$$. Check out the cover of the National Enquirer at the grocery, they love running photos of celebrities lumpy a$$es.
LOL @ Megan. I never thought of that!
That’s nothing. There are more expensive hotels.
@giddy, I think the top suite is $25,000 a night.
St. Barths tends to be that way to keep it exclusive. But it won’t be forever as it becomes overbuilt with hotels it eventually loses the very charm that made people love it in the first place. During the hot season, winter, it is wall to wall moguls, mostly A list celebrities, wealthy and now oligarchs.
It is less fashionable than it used to be but still exclusive.
7000 is typical for the island.
Though there are less expensive options even at Eden Rock. It depends on the season.
What I find puzzling is that the woman comes out with this a few months after the wedding. Before Pippa, David Matthews wasn’t that well -known. Among the one percent maybe, otherwise not really. On the other hand, the French have been working on this since September and seem to have some pretty good indication that these attacks happened.
So even though innocent until proven guilty still stands, it looks pretty shaky.
His hotel business is going to drop. Who the heck is going to stay at a resort where the owner is an accused child rapist?
I do feel sorry for Pippa because the media won’t leave her alone, and I can’t help but wonder if it is the reason why she has shut down her business and has gone quiet since the fall has to do with that. And the last couple of times she was popped she looked glum. Carole must be shitting bricks. After all the negative press Meghan received regarding her family, this is a thousand times worse. She is all about image that woman. That her daughter’s fil should be involved in such a serious crime and could be sent to prison for up to twenty years must be shattering for her. I don’t think it was a happy Easter weekend for her.
The next few months will be telling.
All you said +100
“Before Pippa, David Matthews wasn’t that well -known.”
I’ve never understood this argument. I’m sure any rapist, no matter how famous or not, is well known to the accuser/victim. At this point, he is an alleged rapist, certainly.
I think they meant ‘well-known’ in the sense of being famous to the wider public with the implication that his fame post-Pippa wedding may have made it more rewarding to name him because his fame will ensure his shame.
Can you imagine how cringe-tastic THAT phone call to the grey men at Buckingham Palace must have been?
True dat!
..and this Monster was around PG and Charlotte , also I’d imagine in wedding group photos too with them.
There could be concern in some quarters about this man being around anyone under age, including (but not limited to) the royal grandchildren. If there are big family events in the future with the Middleton and Matthews families off on group vacations to their resorts, Scottish estate, Mustique, skiing, etc? That could bring the royal grandchildren in to his sphere through the years. Mind you, I’d have similar concerns about someone like Andrew too.
I’d be shocked if he’s ever within 1000ft of a Royal again, except perhaps Will and Kate. Even then it will probably be private family events like Christenings, but no way the kids will be there.
Don’t forget how ruthless Carole can be. Ask Uncle Gary.
Why would Buckingham Palace be involved?
A Palace (BP, KP?) *may* have stepped in before to make Pippa’s gun incident disappear so quickly and quietly. And we know what HM has done for Andrew.
KP perhaps, but not BP. Not forgetting that JLP was in charge during that gun incident era.
BP = The Queen. As far as we know Pippa and HM are not on such good terms that she would pull strings for Pippa’s inlaws.
That’s what I was thinking, that KP was a far more likely culprit. As bad as he was, not sure Jason was an improvement over Jamie LP.
Did you read William’s private secretary of 10 years, Miguel Head, quit last week?
I assumed BP would get the initial heads up because of how serious these charges are, but I admit I’m not very familiar with each’s PR set-up.
As to why KP or BP would be involved, letting the BRF learn of this story with everyone else would not endear Pippa any further to them. They will be asked about it and blindsiding them would be a huge no no.
If this was civil litigation, I suppose KP could pressure Matthews to agree to a quick settlement, but since this involves a criminal prosecution in another country, I’m not sure there is much the royal press offices can do beyond planting stories about how Kate and Pippa have drifted apart, hardly see one another, never speak by phone, etc.
Agree with @notasugar…even the Matthews story disappeared from the front page of DM very quickly. It went to one of the side headlines within an hour. Anyone else notice that?
Va va boom: the royal palaces operate as separate entities with order of importance according to seniority of royal. BP / Court of St James = The Queen, CH = Charles, KP = William and Harry.
Their order of importance follows the same. Each palace can operate and put out statements that affect only them. However, BP trumps them all because it’s representing The Queen ergo it’s the Queen’s directive.
The other palaces don’t always inform BP everything that is going on which if it has nothing to do with HM is OK. Sometimes the other palaces can be embroiled in scandal and again BP doesn’t intervene because they don’t think it’s their business or they think it will blow over. The palaces can pull as much authority as they think they can get away with, but ultimately BP trumps them all.
BP doesn’t always interfere or stop shenanigans even if they are super scandalous -see the war of the Wales.
But it is always super obvious when BP interferes because it is followed by absolute closure on the matter. No tittle tattle in the mainstream.
Nota: i did. And like Catherine Quinn, i suspect this was another Charles hire. The man is too high calibre to have been picked by William.
Thank you for explaining that so well. I didn’t realize the different palaces were quite so autonomous from BP.
Maybe the phone call went, George and Charlotte are in photos with an alleged peodooooo, should we have them wiped from photos?
Oh gosh I forgot about all the kids this man must have been around. Thinking of all the parents who had children in the wedding party, they must feel nauseous right now. I know I do.
One of my cousins worked during many years at Eden Rock during his Cannes years. When you work there,you sign a confidentiality agreement.
He had many anecdotes about some celebrities like Depp and DiCaprio banned of Eden Rock after destroying their hotel rooms .Depp made excuses and paid to continue coming it whereas DiCaprio used the influence of his powerful friends to come back
Different Eden Rock. The one in France, famously used during the Cannes Film festival, is near Antibes. The one in this story is in the Caribbean on the island of St Barts.
LOL DiCaprio is such trash. (Not just based on this anecdote, but it does add to it.) He puts up such a great image – environmentally conscious, smart, respected, sErIoUs, conscientious – while being a former member of the Pussy Posse, a boozehound (that’s your business, as long as you’re not hurting others), an annual yacht partier (didn’t some mag do an estimated carbon footprint on that a while back?), a hotel room trasher (yours isn’t hte first account of that LOL), and just a general creep.
Please spill the beans.
20 years after turning 18 is a statute we can only dream of here in America.
Not so. Like I said upthread, IL has a statute of limitations on sex crimes that’s 20 years after the age of majority, aka 18. Source: me, a criminal defense attorney who once had a client charged literally 3 days before the statute ran out, LOL. We now have eliminated the SOL on child sex crimes, which is consistent with a national trend to do so. So, no, many states have 18+20, and many states have better – no limitation.
SOLs for sex crimes mostly depend on the states, as the feds rarely take up sex crimes unless it’s bigger stuff – either sex trafficking or child pornography, or when the sex crime is across state lines and tied to other stuff, likes drugs, guns, or porn. So the individual states make up the rules. In states where you don’t agree with the SOL, join with a local organization on behalf of child victims or general rape victims and lobby your state legislature.
Not to be contrary . . . “We” have not eliminated statutes on child sex crimes.
I’m not questioning you as a source, certainly sounds like the states you note, specifically IL, are interested in protecting a minor victim’s rights into adulthood. I appreciate your comment and will investigate which states in our union have extended such rights.
As a member for several years of such groups, legislation at the federal level would assist our platform at the state level.
Is it possible to prove someone’s guilt in a case like this (rape) 20 years later? There is likely an absence of physical evidence so it becomes a she said/he said case, does it not?
I don’t like the way society convicts the accused before there is a trial. Not everyone who is accused is guilty…nor is everyone who accused honest. That being said, if this man is guilty of this accusation, he needs to go to prison. If he is innocent, his accuser needs jail.
Laura, I am totally with you. I have no idea whether this man is guilty or innocent but plenty of people have already convicted him. If he is guilty then as far as I am concerned they can throw the book at him, but everyone is entitled to a fair trial.
I hope the timing on the complaint did not have anything to do with being after Pippa’s wedding.
And if it did? Perhaps seeing her (alleged rapist) being publicly feted and attached to the in-laws of royals triggered something, including concern for the innocent children surrounding him in those photos. With the MeToo movement she felt empowered to come forward after all these years.
That may be the case, but was he personally being publically feted.
Common theme you’re spinning here, that potential rape victims aren’t really victims but are liars motivated by some other factor like fame or money. Feel the same way about Cosby’s victims?
In many ways Matthews senior was being publicly feted. Pippa’s landing of Terribly Moderately Wealthy James (TM) included much coverage of her wealthy and successful father-in-law. That could easily trigger someone who *may* have personal experience of how wretched that man is behind the scenes.
We are almost a year removed from Pippa’s wedding tough, we are really reaching trying to find reason to disbelieve this woman.
Not saying I believe or disbelieve this woman at all. I’m not reaching, I’m just saying we don’t know all the facts it is important that anyone gets a fair trial, whatever the crime they are accused of.
“I hope the timing on the complaint did not have anything to do with being after Pippa’s wedding. ” reads a lot like “she’s doing this for fame/money” kind of stretch to me.
Apparently the French authorities would not have laid charges without sufficient evidence to feel they could proceed. Let’s just go with that, shall we? Against the general backdrop of knowledge that making rape accusations is very difficult and that when made the majority are determined valid? This alleged victim if a family member had to overcome so many barriers to come forward. Let’s wait and see.
I’m French. This guy is wealthy, white and he has a hell lot more ressources than the lawyers from the “juge d’instruction” office (I’m sorry, I don’t know what is the American equivalent for “juge d’instruction”, maybe District Attorney’s office?). He is going to have a fair trial, believe me. More than fair.
Middleton is Royal Family. So is the Matthews family by marriage into the Middleton family.
Sadly European Royal Families have a habit of killing such law suits. And they don’t necessarily pay money to achieve that. If you google the events of the Dutroux cases (child kidnapping, raping, enforced prostitution) then you find that the Belgian upper class as well as their Royal family are involved. In that Dutroux case there were about 29 witnesses. They all died within 2 years and allegedly it was always suicide.
Sorry but the Middleton’s are no more the Royal Family than I am and the Belgian Royal Family is not the British Royal Family.
Middleton is NOT royal family. Getting a daughter married into the family doesn’t make her birth family royal. Ditto anyone members of the birth family choose to marry or associate with.
Where do these ideas come from?
Btw, different royal families behave differently. What is true about one isn’t necessarily the case regarding the others even if the European families are related.
I use the term “Royal Family” in a wider definition: all people who are related to the RF by marriage are RF. This is adequate because all these people enjoy benefits from being known relatives of the RF. And that is what this posting is about: the benefits of being close to or related to the RF.
Those belgian pedophiles which were protected by the actions of the Belg Roy Fam and the belg upper class weren’t exactly “close family” either.
Look at Epstein. He practically hold minors captive and used them as sex slaves as well as forced them to prostitute themselves for guys like Prince Andrew.
Legally that is:
– sex with a minor
– using a minor prostitute
– captivity of a minor / failure to protect a minor ward adequately / abuse of a dependent minor
– enforced prostitution of a minor (pimping)
All of these things are crimes in all western countries.
Other people go to jail just for not adequately protecting their own children. Epstein merely got a few monthes in a comfy prison. Why do you think did Epstein got away this easily? Well, his friends are upper class and ruling politicians and people like Prince Andrew. All of them pulled some strings and that is why Epstein practically got away.
I think the same thing will happen with the Matthews’ family legal “problem”.
Just wait and observe.
Outside of the royal family connection, it’s unlikely anything will happen to this trash guy because rarely anything happens to men accused or guilty of rape. The idea that those men’s lives are ruined by mere accusations when plenty of famous men pleated guilty to sexual charges and are still welcomed in polite society is grotesque.
The Middletons have pushed the idea that they are royals by association because they love having that association which they use to gain material wealth.
There is no such thing as royal by association or because one of your family members married royalty therefore all of you are royalty henceforth, whatever justification you want to use to explain it.
Secondly, whilst i agree that HM pulled strings to remove Andrew from the consequences of his association with Epstein, i also found the account given in the story to be untrue in the parts about Andrew because she included several details about Andrew’s personal habits which are not true. Anyone familiar with Andrew would know immediately that those details in the story were true and that to me cast doubt on the parts of her story that were about him.
I don’t discount the parts about Epstein because it went to court and he was convicted for it.
Correction: Anyone familiar with Andrew would know immediately that those details in the story were NOT true and that to me
@LAK
The problem with the Andrew story is that in America there were more details and more witnesses and victims. Because it involves high-level Americans, the story doesn’t get the press it should, but Andrew did for a short while. There was a long article about him that I can’t find because I can’t remember the publication. It was rather shocking.
Magnoliarose: the UK media extracted the parts that dealt with Andrew and published. They barely mentioned the US celebrities and politicians involved in the story.
The overall picture was indeed shocking, as are many articles written about Andrew in general,BUT it was the untrue personal details about Andrew in these articles which made me question the parts that related to him specifically.
The Middleton’s, Matthews and the Markles are not royal…
only in Tata Mata’s mind are those 3 families royal. we all live in reality and know the truth.
I do feel somewhat sorry for Jane Matthews providing she knew nothing of this. They have been married for around 45 years and imagine going through that at 70. Her son Michael died aged 22 on his way down from Everest. Her younger son Spencer is a total sicko bragging about sleeping with over 1,000 women. I am waiting for someone to come out about something relating to him. Because I can’t honestly believe that all his conquests were consensual. Now his fiancée Vogue Williams is pregnant and is probably wishing she wasn’t. But regardless of whether Jane supports her husband in theory, there is going to be a huge question mark over his head until this is resolved.
There must be at least a fairly strong case to bring charges so far after the fact. I wish more countries had a longer statute of limitations in these types of crimes, or better yet none at all.
As for Pippa, I get why her name is being used, she’s the most noteworthy person “connected” to the family. Whatever, I’m still not over the fact that her brother in law is that asshat Spencer from Made In Chelsea, he was the absolute worst lol.
The usual “fair trial”, “not everyone is guilty” people are already on this thread so friendly reminder that no matter how logical and reasonable they sound, THEY are the outlier, THEY are the ones going against statistics and facts. False rape accusations represent less than 5% of accusations, and this figure is no bigger than that of false non-sexual assaults. Just something to keep in mind as we go forward with the case.
They are entitled to a point of view Kate, I have an open mind on the matter of his guilt or innocence.
While casting aspersions that the timing is related to Pippa’s wedding, implying negative things about the woman not coming forward until after that.
We can keep an open mind while still being aware that the allegations are far more likely to be supported than not.
That’s not the same as acting like judge and jury; it’s being aware of the probabilities in any given case.
Oh please.
I have an open mind and I haven’t decided whether or not he’s guilty. However, as a former victim myself, I know that victims have very little incentive to come forward, particuarly for child abuse and assault. It’s so painful that victims, especially of sex crimes, never come forward. With the media storm that was surely going to follow and the unlikely outcome of a criminal sentence so long after the fact, she is doing this for nothing more than reparation and perhaps, her own way of healing.
It’s clear the media is using Pippas name to sensationalize the crime. Pipsqeak has nothing to do with it.
Life will be so boring if we couldn’t blame a woman for a man’s actions. We saw that with the Weinstein scandal. Rose McGowan flat-out said that Ben Affleck knew about her assault and probably about at least one other, but it was Meryl Streep who had her face painted with “SHE KNEW” on a street.
+1000. Hopefully any future sex predatorgate won’t involve the kind of shitty, misogynistic responses from adults that Weinstein’s exposed behaviors invoked.
Slightly off-topic, given the headline, but sort of on-topic (in relation to the other comments) re: Pippa and Carole using the royal family connections to promote themselves
Didn’t Princess Diana’s brother sort of do this at times? Her sisters were always really quiet and low-key (and still are) and possibly dignified, but the brother has always been on tv in some capacity. But no one seemed concerned that he pushed his connection to Diana to be on the Today show and to get promotion for his books and the Althorp estate. Is it considered more okay (or less bad?) to do this if you’re a landed aristocrat and an Earl? I don’t see a difference between what he does and what Kate’s family does in terms of self-promotion, but nobody seems to care when he does it.
Charles Spencer absolutely promoted himself and used the royal connection. He was mocked for it, but as the era has faded, we’ve forgotten that he was mocked for it. Every so often an article is written about him that points to his using his sister, but as the memory of the diana era fades, so do the different players and the things their actions.
Not forgetting that Charles had a brilliant PR masterstroke in recasting himself as Diana’s defender at her funeral whilst leaving out the inconvenient truth of his fractious relationship with her, his refusal to help her and using his association to profit himself.
Most people remember that moment more than the negativity.
Help me with the math? She was 15 in 1998 at the time of the first incident but turned 18 in 2003?!? There’s got to be a typo there but which part is wrong?
I think it’s sickening how some are trying to use the accusations against David Matthews as a way to bash the Middletons or the Cambridge family. Whatever you may think of them, this allegation has absolutely nothing to do with them, and nor should they be blamed or dragged because of it. This is purely between David Matthews & his accuser.
And if anyone is worried about the palace’s reaction just remember the allegations against Prince Andrew. Also Jimmy Savile who was allowed to mingle closely with the royals including the Queen & he was good friends with Prince Charles. When you take all this into consideration I fail to see how the father-in-law of the royal adjacent is deemed newsworthy or more scandalous.
It’s incredible that fans of the Royal family are bashing the Middletons based on that when they support the Royal family. Like, you do know that your dear, dutiful Queen basically made the Epstein story disappear right? Talk about enabling!
This has nothing to do with Pippa. However, it has a lot to do with wealth, fame, power and privilege. She is connected to that, inevitably.
It is not only the wealthy or the famous that commit sexual abuse. It is far more widespread than that. Many everyday people are connected to this than we like to think.
Of course not. My point, which I probably made badly, is that in the past the elites were often exempted from paying the consequences, until #metoo leveled the playing field a little bit (we still have a long way to go).
The media can be blamed for the headline. They chose to splash Pippa’s name just to get clicks.
No matter what Pippa did to get publicity, she is not to be blamed for some rapist who is her in law.
Chef Grace, I agree with you. I feel so sorry for the victim(s) & their family. I feel sorry for the accused’s family (including Pippa). I always tell people that I never want to be famous…it brings too much baggage & barrage…
I feel sorry for his wife and children and lost importantly the victim.
I know Spencer gets a bad rap around here and he was really obnoxious on MIC days ( although he made that show entertaining imo) but I think he has grown up a lot these past few years with all the charity work he does in honour of his brother who died. He seemed to finally address his behaviours and addictions, opened up about the death and found a woman he loves and just announced not long ago that they are engaged and having a child.
I think knowing that your own blood did something so evil is hard enough to deal with under everyday circumstances. But when you are anticipating your first child and parents first grandchild during all of this I could not even imagine. And what’s more the victim is family. It is all horrible.
Why do I have a feeling that sons will be paying for the sins of the father? I think the media already hated Spencer so they will be throwing this around and gloating. The wide Jane will of course be blamed for just about everything Too. God forbid a grown man ever be responsible for the evil he does to others.
The father and both sons have hideous rumours of that type surrounding them.
Both sons? I’d heard one of them had a habit of raping the help, and the family constantly covering it up, but didn’t know which one. I assumed Spencer.
There were 3 sons, the eldest died in a mountaineering accident on Everest.
Pray tell?
Eh, of course Pippa is going to be mentioned, it is her FIL. It’s unfortunate when you have crappy family members…don’t we all to some extent?
Thanks for the heads up celebitches on Andrew/Epsteing! It’s all so disturbing. I’m no Fergie fan, but really?? She’s the unsavory one?
It is disturbing but mummy used her power to hide the story away so her favourite Andrew would not have to be brought to task apparently. I thought the Queen did not have that sort of power.
I bet James Matthews’s hedge fund took a big hit today on the market.
Yes Mia, its just a myth that the queen is just a little old lady who is an impotent figurehead only.
Isn’t Eden Roc owned by Nazi sympathizers too? Sadly, I don’t think people care about that and will continue to do their dirty deeds at this very hotel.
Wait, that may be the one in Cannes.
Surely she would have turned 18 in 2001 meaning time is running out to deal with the case.