Yes, I knew someone at the school at that time. Apparently Andy’s antics included an encounter on a pool table …
On a pool table? The jokes write themselves, but I’ll refrain.
I’ll just say that based on my co-worker’s anecdotes, it doesn’t surprise me a bit.
Why was Prince Andrew going to high school in Canada?
The version I heard was that the school admin tried to land him, since they are a well-known boys’ boarding school, and that Andrew was interested in Canada. Beyond that, I don’t know.
Exchange program while at Gordonstoun …
Wikipedia:
"…In September 1973, he entered Gordonstoun, in northern Scotland, which his father and elder brother had also attended. While there, he spent six months—from January to June 1977—participating in an exchange programme to Lakefield College School in Canada.!
The version I heard was that the Queen and Prince Philip wanted to give their sons a more “Commonwealth” education. Charles had been educated at his father’s school (Gordonstoun) in the UK, but the Queen recognized that the UK was no longer the centre of the universe. And so, Andrew was sent to Canada (part of the Commonwealth), and later, Edward would go to New Zealand (also part of the Commonwealth).
Well, Lakefield College School isn’t that well-known by Toronto’s movers and shakers. They much prefer that their kids go to Upper Canada College, St. George’s, or Crescent (boys), or Branksome Hall, Havergal, or Bishop Strachan (girls).
Kind of an interesting anecdote, but a teenaged boy being a raging horndog is not exactly a novelty.
ETA: I suppose his mother and father might have thought it unseemly, I suppose.
Canada lost the coin toss. 
It’s good to be a Prince!
Had he stopped in high school or college then I’m sure he wouldn’t have gotten the nickname.
Eight John Does will soon be unmasked. John’s, that seems appropriate.
Prince Andrew is low hanging fruit compared to other people that may be named. He doesn’t have any real political power. His royal family has kicked him off the gravy train.
Technically, in the village of Lakefield, just north of Peterborough, Ontario.
(Cite: lived in Peterborough and passed by the school many times on the way up Highway 28.)
Funny!
Apparently this is Virginia Giuffre’s third lawsuit? She went after Epstein in 2009 and got a settlement.
Then Maxwell is sued in 2016. I assume the 8 John Does provided a substantial settlement.
Now Prince Andrew will probably pay a settlement.
Virginia Giuffre is a victim. I’m a bit uncomfortable with her constant litigation.
I have a feeling someone else will be sued in a few years.
I feel a bit uncomfortable it’s taken this long for the authorities to actually go after all the perps.
If that requires 100 lawsuits, that says more about a broken system of justice than a victim’s litigious nature.
His place in the line of succession is pretty much irrelevant by now. Seven folks would have to drop dead to put him in the position of heir.
Why? If I were her I’d be trying to nail all these people to the wall as often and as hard as I could. Epstein famously got off essentially free in 2008 with a non-prosecution agreement. This was done without the victims having being informed ahead of time, which was eventually determined to have been illegal. She’s been trying to nail these people ever since. Prince Andrew first came up in 2014, but it was from documents dating back to when they were preparing the Criminal Victims Rights Act case in 2008 filed after Epstein was allowed to walk. This is nothing new, really - it just has been a long, winding road to unravel Epstein’s sleazy little empire.
Epstein and Maxwell were the ones that recruited Giuffre, flew her around the world, and introduced her to their influential friends (allegedly for sex). Epstein and Maxwell both paid settlements. The 8 unnamed men probably paid too. Epstein is dead and Maxwell will probably spend decades in prison.
It seems like the guilty have been punished and Justice served. I completely agree with this outcome. Giuffre was victimized primarily by Epstein and Maxwell.
Isn’t their a difference in getting justice and profiteering? I don’t know where that line can be drawn. But it’s somewhere in this discussion.
Giuffre claims that Andrew is guilty of sexual assault on her and has in the past accused him of participating in an orgy that included multiple underage girls (not part of the current suit). If this is true Andrew is guilty, has not been sufficiently punished and justice has not yet been fully served.
She could be profiteering, it’s true. Andrew may have hooked up with her entirely legally or even not at all. But Andrew does not exactly ooze innocence, his name came up early in all of these investigations and we know factually Giuffre was abused by folks Andrew hung out with. I’m fine with seeing where this goes.