Prince Andrew

[Psychedelicropcircle]

10 hours ago, A Boy Named Crow said:

Is this a sign of them beginning to turn the screw? If he can be demonstrated to be a bare faced liar, it won't help his case in court...

 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/dec/31/giuffre-lawyers-seek-details-on-prince-andrew-claimed-inability-to-sweat

I was out on Wednesday getting pished & turns out getting a dose of the “rona”! That night I couldn’t believe how hot I got & didn’t sweat…if your reading this Prince Andrew😅

[Cade]

US Federal judge rejects Randy Andy's attempts to throw out the law suit.

His legal team must now surrender documents to the court.

 

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

40 minutes ago, Cade said:

US Federal judge rejects Randy Andy's attempts to throw out the law suit.

His legal team must now surrender documents to the court.

 

 

 

[Jambo-Jimbo]

44 minutes ago, Cade said:

US Federal judge rejects Randy Andy's attempts to throw out the law suit.

His legal team must now surrender documents to the court.

 

 

Which now leaves him only two real options, that I can see.

 

Settle out of court or let the case be heard in court, I would think he'll be getting strongly advised to settle out of court.

 

 

[frankblack]

18 minutes ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

Which now leaves him only two real options, that I can see.

 

Settle out of court or let the case be heard in court, I would think he'll be getting strongly advised to settle out of court.

 

 

 

That's how I see it.  This causes the royals a major issue as to settle would be perceived as an admission of guilt.  His hopes of returning to Royal duties would clearly be over.

[Footballfirst]

24 minutes ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

Which now leaves him only two real options, that I can see.

 

Settle out of court or let the case be heard in court, I would think he'll be getting strongly advised to settle out of court.

Mum, can I ask you a favour?

[Jambo-Jimbo]

4 minutes ago, frankblack said:

 

That's how I see it.  This causes the royals a major issue as to settle would be perceived as an admission of guilt.  His hopes of returning to Royal duties would clearly be over.

 

Cause them a much larger issue if he lets his dirty linen be aired in court.

 

Settle out of court with an NDA in place, that way no sorded details are in the public domain, he can then wait for the dust to settle, safe in the knowledge that no details are out there, also safe in the knowledge that Ms Giuffre isn't going to talk.

Or

Let it go to court, allow all the sorded details come out, risk being found liable and still have to pay.......but then have the prospect that Ms Giuffre is then free to do the talk show rounds, maybe even have a special with Oprah.

 

If it were me, I know what option I'd choose, however by all accounts Andy isn't the sharpest tool in the box.

[frankblack]

3 minutes ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

Cause them a much larger issue if he lets his dirty linen be aired in court.

 

Settle out of court with an NDA in place, that way no sorded details are in the public domain, he can then wait for the dust to settle, safe in the knowledge that no details are out there, also safe in the knowledge that Ms Giuffre isn't going to talk.

Or

Let it go to court, allow all the sorded details come out, risk being found liable and still have to pay.......but then have the prospect that Ms Giuffre is then free to do the talk show rounds, maybe even have a special with Oprah.

 

If it were me, I know what option I'd choose, however by all accounts Andy isn't the sharpest tool in the box.

 

If he settles he will be finished with public duties as crowds will turn on him.

[Savage Vince]

5 minutes ago, frankblack said:

 

If he settles he will be finished with public duties as crowds will turn on him.

 

I think most people have made their mind up on this tbh. 

 

I also don't think that the public are behind any members of that mob other than the queen. 

[Jambo-Jimbo]

12 minutes ago, frankblack said:

 

If he settles he will be finished with public duties as crowds will turn on him.

 

No matter what way, he's finished as far as the public are concerned, there is really no way back for him.

[Jambo-Jimbo]

8 minutes ago, Savage Vince said:

 

I think most people have made their mind up on this tbh. 

 

I also don't think that the public are behind any members of that mob other than the queen. 

 

It's going to be interesting how much support Charles/Camilla, William/Kate get from the public after the Queen goes, and what I mean is long after Charles' coronation, if there is still the same level of support for him & the monarchy as there is now.

[Hmfc1965]

6 minutes ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

It's going to be interesting how much support Charles/Camilla, William/Kate get from the public after the Queen goes, and what I mean is long after Charles' coronation, if there is still the same level of support for him & the monarchy as there is now.

I think William and Kate have a chance. 

Charles and Camilla, no.

[Savage Vince]

6 minutes ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

It's going to be interesting how much support Charles/Camilla, William/Kate get from the public after the Queen goes, and what I mean is long after Charles' coronation, if there is still the same level of support for him & the monarchy as there is now.

 

I think the current public support is grossly exaggerated by the most corrupt media anywhere but I get what you mean.. 

[Maroon Sailor]

1 hour ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

Cause them a much larger issue if he lets his dirty linen be aired in court.

 

Settle out of court with an NDA in place, that way no sorded details are in the public domain, he can then wait for the dust to settle, safe in the knowledge that no details are out there, also safe in the knowledge that Ms Giuffre isn't going to talk.

Or

Let it go to court, allow all the sorded details come out, risk being found liable and still have to pay.......but then have the prospect that Ms Giuffre is then free to do the talk show rounds, maybe even have a special with Oprah.

 

If it were me, I know what option I'd choose, however by all accounts Andy isn't the sharpest tool in the box.

 

He's arrogant

 

The Newsnight interview showed us just how arrogant. It never worked out the way he had in his mind.

 

He left that interview with his pants round his ankles

[A Boy Named Crow]

1 hour ago, Hmfc1965 said:

I think William and Kate have a chance. 

Charles and Camilla, no.

If the reports that Wills has been dipping his wick elsewhere turn out to have legs,  then I reckon they're done for.  He was their great hope,  but if he turns out to be just like the rest of them... well, what can you do?

[kila]

Can only imagine the season Netflix dedicate to this as part of their 'The Crown' series is going to be quite something

 

[A Boy Named Crow]

7 minutes ago, kila said:

Can only imagine the season Netflix dedicate to this as part of their 'The Crown' series is going to be quite something

 

I believe they are wrapping it up in the early 00's. You never know though,  in this age of reboots etc...

 

[JackLadd]

There's no way he didn't do the deed. The lady Ghislaine should give him up.

[Maple Leaf]

2 hours ago, Hmfc1965 said:

I think William and Kate have a chance. 

Charles and Camilla, no.

 

The only thing standing between us and a King Charles and a Queen Camilla is a 95-year old woman..

[Unknown user]

24 minutes ago, Maple Leaf said:

 

The only thing standing between us and a King Charles and a Queen Camilla is a 95-year old woman..

A 95 year old woman with a bionic bumhole and people to chew her swan for her. She's got a few years of defending her goldpile ahead of her yet, gawd bless her majestic scaly hide.

[Guest]

The enthusiasm  on this thread for someone to have been guilty of a sexual offence is quite something.

[Doctor FinnBarr]

3 minutes ago, Jonkel Hoon said:

The enthusiasm  on this thread for someone to have been guilty of a sexual offence is quite something.

 

Is he guilty or not then?

[Guest]

Just now, FinnBarr Saunders said:

 

Is he guilty or not then?

I've no idea.  The less sex offenders in the world the better. Hopefully he's not done anything  illegal.

 

If he's guilty, then he should face the full force of the law

[Tott]

5 minutes ago, Jonkel Hoon said:

I've no idea.  The less sex offenders in the world the better. Hopefully he's not done anything  illegal.

 

If he's guilty, then he should face the full force of the law

 or just join the catholic church

 

for the humourlous  fuctards..hate all religion 🙂 

Edited January 2, 2022 by Tott

[Unknown user]

7 minutes ago, Jonkel Hoon said:

The enthusiasm  on this thread for someone to have been guilty of a sexual offence is quite something.

 

I'm enthusiastic about seeing the mega privileged put in uncomfortable situations as a result of their own entitlement, I reckon pretty much everyone else is the same

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Smithee said:

 

I'm enthusiastic about seeing the mega privileged put in uncomfortable situations as a result of their own entitlement, I reckon pretty much everyone else is the same

So, jf he's not guilty, he should be tarred as a sex offender because  of his perceived class?

 

 

[Unknown user]

1 minute ago, Jonkel Hoon said:

So, jf he's not guilty, he should be tarred as a sex offender because  of his perceived class?

 

 

"Perceived class" lol

 

It's not a criminal case so a bit irrelevant, but I couldn't care less how the allegedly sweaty nonce is tarred.

[Unknown user]

Won't someone think of the mega privileged?

[Guest]

Just now, Smithee said:

 

"Perceived class" lol

 

It's not a criminal case so a bit irrelevant, but I couldn't care less how the allegedly sweaty nonce is tarred.

Its just a bit odd judging  someone on their "class".

 

On the scale of mega privileged to jakey scumbag, I'm far nearer the latter, so have no skin in the game as it were. 

 

 

[Unknown user]

5 minutes ago, Jonkel Hoon said:

Its just a bit odd judging  someone on their "class".

 

On the scale of mega privileged to jakey scumbag, I'm far nearer the latter, so have no skin in the game as it were. 

 

 

Not sure what you mean by judging him on his class, his class defines him, we wouldn't know who he was if he wasn't son of the reigning monarch.

 

He's being judged because at best he's a sleazy liar and at worst - well there are fences and everything.

[Unknown user]

8 minutes ago, Jonkel Hoon said:

Its just a bit odd judging  someone on their "class".

 

On the scale of mega privileged to jakey scumbag, I'm far nearer the latter, so have no skin in the game as it were. 

 

 

By the way, this isn't random. Although I'd have them all detrousered and radished I'm fairly ambivalent about most of the royals on a personal level. But he's a bellend.

I always go back to that butler's book, where he revealed that the royals all have nicknames among the staff. Andrew's was "the ****"

[Unknown user]

I realised I'm on 2 paths here, because I am enjoying the humiliation of mega privilege. I suppose it's a combination of the 2 things.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Smithee said:

 

Not sure what you mean by judging him on his class, his class defines him, we wouldn't know who he was if he wasn't son of the reigning monarch.

 

He's being judged because at best he's a sleazy liar and at worst - well there are fences and everything.

The fact you described him as mega privileged should answer your first sentence. His class has nothing to do with it.  It's inverted snobbery.

 

It's the same as assuming someone from a council house is guilty with the same allegations.  You're judging on how you perceive him.

[Unknown user]

1 minute ago, Jonkel Hoon said:

The fact you described him as mega privileged should answer your first sentence. His class has nothing to do with it.  It's inverted snobbery.

 

It's the same as assuming someone from a council house is guilty with the same allegations.  You're judging on how you perceive him.

 

I'm judging him on sweaty noncery and being a massive teat, as well as enjoying watching one of the mega privileged squirm.

[A Boy Named Crow]

20 minutes ago, Jonkel Hoon said:

Its just a bit odd judging  someone on their "class".

 

On the scale of mega privileged to jakey scumbag, I'm far nearer the latter, so have no skin in the game as it were. 

 

 

I don't think he is being judged on his "class", rather he is being judged for being a sleazy, disgusting sex pest and a liar. 

 

Now, you could say it is unfair for people to assume his guilt at this stage, but anyone who saw that interview...

 

It's probably more accurate to say his "class" is being judged by his actions and the reactions of those who share his "class". None of us here forced him to befriend a paedophile, or to attend parties with under-age girls, I think it's fair to judge someone by his actions, don't you?

Edited January 2, 2022 by A Boy Named Crow

[Guest]

Just now, Smithee said:

 

I'm judging him on sweaty noncery and being a massive teat, as well as enjoying watching one of the mega privileged squirm.

Yes, it appears you are.

[Guest]

Just now, A Boy Named Crow said:

I don't think he is being judged on his "class", rather he is being judged for being a sleazy, disgusting sex pest and a liar. 

 

Now, you could say it is unfair for people to assume his guilt at this stage, but anyone who saw that interview...

 

It's probably more accurate to say his "class" is bring judged by his actions and the reactions of those who share his "class". None of us here forced him to befriend a paedophile, or to attend parties with under-age girls, I think it's fair to judge someone by his actions, don't you?

His interview  was a car crash, no doubt about it, but your description in your first paragraph is judgemental and assumptive.

 

Did he know Epstein was a peado? Can anyone guarantee all of their friends are not?

[Unknown user]

3 minutes ago, Jonkel Hoon said:

Yes, it appears you are.

You seem into the idea that people think he's guilty because of who he is.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Smithee said:

You seem into the idea that people think he's guilty because of who he is.

Yes, that's the general direction of this thread 

[Unknown user]

Just now, Jonkel Hoon said:

Yes, that's the general direction of this thread 

 

Piffle

[A Boy Named Crow]

1 minute ago, Jonkel Hoon said:

His interview  was a car crash, no doubt about it, but your description in your first paragraph is judgemental and assumptive.

 

Did he know Epstein was a peado? Can anyone guarantee all of their friends are not?

I acknowledge it is judgemental, but a judgement that comes from his own actions really.  

 

Epstein's private jet was known as the Lolita Express, if Andrew claims he didn't have a scooby about his mate's habits...maybe he just hadn't read the book / seen the film I suppose. 

[Dirty Deeds]

7 hours ago, Jonkel Hoon said:

His interview  was a car crash, no doubt about it, but your description in your first paragraph is judgemental and assumptive.

 

Did he know Epstein was a peado? Can anyone guarantee all of their friends are not?

He stayed pals after he Epstein was convicted so I guess he had an idea. 

[Maroon Sailor]

8 hours ago, Jonkel Hoon said:

His interview  was a car crash, no doubt about it, but your description in your first paragraph is judgemental and assumptive.

 

Did he know Epstein was a peado? Can anyone guarantee all of their friends are not?

 

I believe he agreed to do that interview because he thought he would come across as all sweetness and light. Tried to play it cool to achieve that but it wasn't a walk in the park for him as he probably thought it would be and he ended up overthinking some of his answers.

 

[Captain Sausage]

The guy is, regardless of guilt on these allegations, an absolutely contemptuous prick. 
 

You can tell he believes himself above reproach and the interview with Maitliss shows this in spades. 
 

No corroboration of being in Woking (I’m certain a man of his standing would have little problem in attaining ANPR or other proof that he was in Woking at the time) and the no-sweat thing is just clear bullshit. 
 

That interview is paralleled only by the Trump/Swan one in terms of unprepared idiot making bigger idiot of himself in front of the world. 
 

The fact he is so closely aligned with a known sex abuser and borderline paedophile, even after knowing publicly, says everything about the man’s character. 
 

Hope he sinks with the rest of that disgusting family. 

[Jambo-Jimbo]

10 hours ago, Jonkel Hoon said:

His interview  was a car crash, no doubt about it, but your description in your first paragraph is judgemental and assumptive.

 

Did he know Epstein was a peado? Can anyone guarantee all of their friends are not?

 

It's not really a question of whether he knew Epstein was a peado, but more a question of when did he know.

The answer to that question could have major implications for Andrew, of which I don't think I need to spell it out for people.

 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

It's not really a question of whether he knew Epstein was a peado, but more a question of when did he know.

The answer to that question could have major implications for Andrew, of which I don't think I need to spell it out for people.

 

Good point.

 

[Jambo-Jimbo]

2 hours ago, Maroon Sailor said:

 

I believe he agreed to do that interview because he thought he would come across as all sweetness and light. Tried to play it cool to achieve that but it wasn't a walk in the park for him as he probably thought it would be and he ended up overthinking some of his answers.

 

 

Was he not advised not to do the interview, but ignored that advice a he knew better.

His own sense of the level of his intelligence got the better of him.

Edited January 2, 2022 by Jambo-Jimbo

[Boof]

I can recall briefly meeting Gary Mackay outside that carpet shop near Tollcross  in 1984.

 

Surely there'd be some plate-purchasing flag-shagger who'd remember seeing someone as recognisable as mummy's favourite tucking into his pizza...if he was actually there.

 

FWIW - I believe the fence.

[Spellczech]

16 hours ago, Jonkel Hoon said:

His interview  was a car crash, no doubt about it, but your description in your first paragraph is judgemental and assumptive.

 

Did he know Epstein was a peado? Can anyone guarantee all of their friends are not?

Andrew certainly did after Epstein's first conviction but still got himself photographed walking in a park with him...

 

I doubt he knew quite how unsavoury Epstein and Weinstein were when he invited them to his daughter's 18th birthday - would be a bizarre thing to do if he did...

 

The only troubling thing with Andrew is what he thought he was doing bedding the 17 year old employee of his pal...(He denies that he did). If it gets proven that he did and he lied about not doing it (along with the pretty obvious lie about not being capable of sweating) then he has a problem. The employee status of Roberts makes it very different from her just being part of a social group and you'd have to be daft not to infer that he didn't know or suspect that Epstein was getting more than massages too... - Whilst not necessarily a criminal issue it is certainly a moral problem which doesn't sit well with being the second son of the Head of the Church of England...

 

 

[Savage Vince]

7 hours ago, Maroon Sailor said:

 

I believe he agreed to do that interview because he thought he would come across as all sweetness and light. Tried to play it cool to achieve that but it wasn't a walk in the park for him as he probably thought it would be and he ended up overthinking some of his answers.

 

 

It was an utter car crash of an interview. Maitlis was interviewed about the interview and said she couldn't believe what was coming out of his mouth.