Jump to content

Prince Andrew


Maroon Sailor

Recommended Posts

On 10/08/2021 at 13:00, jack D and coke said:

Wouldn’t it just be wonderful if Johnson was at the helm when Scotland left the union and the Royal Family were ended and one of them ragdolled through courts and declared a nonce. 
:glorious: 

Amen :clap:

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 314
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Auldbenches

    39

  • Jambo-Jimbo

    29

  • The Real Maroonblood

    17

  • A Boy Named Crow

    14

On 10/08/2021 at 13:00, jack D and coke said:

Wouldn’t it just be wonderful if Johnson was at the helm when Scotland left the union and the Royal Family were ended and one of them ragdolled through courts and declared a nonce. 
:glorious: 

 

It would be absolutely tremendous. Dream scenario. 

:jjyay:

Edited by Ray Gin
Link to post
Share on other sites
Savage Vince
12 hours ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

The Queen could do untold damage to her own legacy and the whole Royal family, if she does try and overly protect Andrew.

 

Reckon? Who's going to record or report that? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
doctor jambo

Not to throw a spanner in here, but proving he knew she was trafficked is difficult.

If he didn’t , then he had sex with a woman over the age of consent, with her consent .

cannot stand the royals , but beyond it being a bit sleezy, are we not jumping the gun ?

Of course if it happened in the US, then she was under age, but as far as I’m aware it was only in London

Link to post
Share on other sites
The Real Maroonblood
1 hour ago, doctor jambo said:

Not to throw a spanner in here, but proving he knew she was trafficked is difficult.

If he didn’t , then he had sex with a woman over the age of consent, with her consent .

cannot stand the royals , but beyond it being a bit sleezy, are we not jumping the gun ?

Of course if it happened in the US, then she was under age, but as far as I’m aware it was only in London

If it happened in the USA it would depend what State it happened as there are different ages of consent.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, doctor jambo said:

Not to throw a spanner in here, but proving he knew she was trafficked is difficult.

If he didn’t , then he had sex with a woman over the age of consent, with her consent .

cannot stand the royals , but beyond it being a bit sleezy, are we not jumping the gun ?

Of course if it happened in the US, then she was under age, but as far as I’m aware it was only in London

 

The allegations relate to 3 separate incidents, London, New York and the US Virgin Islands. No idea of the legalities of it in those regions, but it isn't just London.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Jambo-Jimbo
54 minutes ago, jvm32 said:

 

The allegations relate to 3 separate incidents, London, New York and the US Virgin Islands. No idea of the legalities of it in those regions, but it isn't just London.

 

Just googled it and in New York it's 17 & the US Virgin Islands it's 16, don't know what the age of consent was when the alleged incidences happened.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/08/2021 at 07:14, superjack said:

That's a bit far, she gave birth to them and then let her staff bring them up.

Yes, I blame the staff, they were probably far too lenient.  I bet Andrew never had a skelp on the backside from his nanny, and he's probably bitterly disappointed about that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, doctor jambo said:

Not to throw a spanner in here, but proving he knew she was trafficked is difficult.

If he didn’t , then he had sex with a woman over the age of consent, with her consent .

cannot stand the royals , but beyond it being a bit sleezy, are we not jumping the gun ?

Of course if it happened in the US, then she was under age, but as far as I’m aware it was only in London

They first have to prove he had sex with her.  He claims to have no recollection of ever having met her.  Even if there was irrefutable evidence that he did have sex with her (say someone had been secretly filming proceedings) then they would still have to prove it was non-consensual.

 

I'm not sure what the burden of proof is in a civil case in the USA.  Is it 'balance of probabilities' as it is in the UK?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Spellczech
12 hours ago, doctor jambo said:

Not to throw a spanner in here, but proving he knew she was trafficked is difficult.

If he didn’t , then he had sex with a woman over the age of consent, with her consent .

cannot stand the royals , but beyond it being a bit sleezy, are we not jumping the gun ?

Of course if it happened in the US, then she was under age, but as far as I’m aware it was only in London

Is it not more of a problem in US that she was 17, rather than 18 - I believe the sex was in UK but there was allegedly oral in NYC...? Proof beyond balance of probabilities might not be so hard when you look at 2 40-somethings hanging out with a 17 year old "masseuse" who also gives their 40-something pal "extras"...You'd have to be pretty naive not to wonder about that one...

Link to post
Share on other sites
JimmyCant

Prince Andrew should have, and quite possibly still will, stick Ghislaine Maxwell firmly in the frame for this. All he needs to say is that Maxwell introduced her and said she was old  enough. He can also say that Epstein confirmed it (which can’t be denied or disproven) 

 

The boy’s an utter idiot for THAT TV interview, as is his lawyer for allowing it, but I doubt very much it’s admissible in US law. He’s  not the sharpest tool in the Royal box. This will never see the inside of a courtroom. It will be settled with a huge payment, unless of course Ghislaine decides to bring the house down for a plea deal. She knows a lot of stuff that a lot of famous people won’t want getting out.

 

It’s a popcorn case and I hope we get her trial live.

Edited by JimmyCant
Link to post
Share on other sites
Maple Leaf
2 hours ago, RobNox said:

Yes, I blame the staff, they were probably far too lenient.  I bet Andrew never had a skelp on the backside from his nanny, and he's probably bitterly disappointed about that.

:rofl:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Jambo-Jimbo
52 minutes ago, JimmyCant said:

Prince Andrew should have, and quite possibly still will, stick Ghislaine Maxwell firmly in the frame for this. All he needs to say is that Maxwell introduced her and said she was old  enough. He can also say that Epstein confirmed it (which can’t be denied or disproven) 

 

The boy’s an utter idiot for THAT TV interview, as is his lawyer for allowing it, but I doubt very much it’s admissible in US law. He’s  not the sharpest tool in the Royal box. This will never see the inside of a courtroom. It will be settled with a huge payment, unless of course Ghislaine decides to bring the house down for a plea deal. She knows a lot of stuff that a lot of famous people won’t want getting out.

 

It’s a popcorn case and I hope we get her trial live.

 

I don't think he's smart enough to think like that.

 

There was a Sunday Times journo on the TV this morning who had interviewed Andrew some years ago, anyway I can't remember the exact phrase he used but it was along the lines of Andrew has an exaggerated opinion of his own intelligence.  In other words he's as thick as shit, but thinks he's a genius.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The Frenchman Returns

Thought I would look across the pond to see how its being viewed there. The Prince Andrew strategy would appear to be drag it out as long as possible. Article in USA Today

 

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/celebrities/2021/08/11/prince-andrews-legal-options-epstein-accuser-virginia-giuffre-lawsuit/5557425001/

 

Found this paragraph particularly galling, especially the part I have highlighted. It is 2021 isn't it?

 

That's not going to happen because Andrew can't be forced to participate in an American proceeding. He can't be extradited because it's a civil lawsuit, not criminal charges. As a "prince of full blood," he could claim sovereign immunity, which could take years to resolve if challenged, Stephens says

Link to post
Share on other sites
A Boy Named Crow

I'm rewatching the Newsnight interview. It's even worse than I remembered! You know your country has problems when this is the family you choose to have ruling over you!

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

I don't think he's smart enough to think like that.

 

There was a Sunday Times journo on the TV this morning who had interviewed Andrew some years ago, anyway I can't remember the exact phrase he used but it was along the lines of Andrew has an exaggerated opinion of his own intelligence.  In other words he's as thick as shit, but thinks he's a genius.

 

That butler that did a book said the royal family all had nicknames among the palace staff - Andrew's was The ****.

 

So not only is he thick as utter ****, he's a **** too.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Maple Leaf
18 hours ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

I don't think he's smart enough to think like that.

 

There was a Sunday Times journo on the TV this morning who had interviewed Andrew some years ago, anyway I can't remember the exact phrase he used but it was along the lines of Andrew has an exaggerated opinion of his own intelligence.  In other words he's as thick as shit, but thinks he's a genius.

 

You could probably say the same about all of Queen Victoria's descendants.  A quick assessment of the royal family in the last 100+ years suggests that they are all a bunch of over-privileged dullards.

Link to post
Share on other sites
jonnothejambo
16 hours ago, A Boy Named Crow said:

I'm rewatching the Newsnight interview. It's even worse than I remembered! You know your country has problems when this is the family you choose to have ruling over you!

 

You can see it in his eyes that he's a lying turd. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Jambo-Jimbo
1 hour ago, Maple Leaf said:

 

You could probably say the same about all of Queen Victoria's descendants.  A quick assessment of the royal family in the last 100+ years suggests that they are all a bunch of over-privileged dullards.

 

I think you could go further back than her.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Francis Albert
17 hours ago, A Boy Named Crow said:

I'm rewatching the Newsnight interview. It's even worse than I remembered! You know your country has problems when this is the family you choose to have ruling over you!

Choose?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Francis Albert
18 hours ago, The Frenchman Returns said:

Thought I would look across the pond to see how its being viewed there. The Prince Andrew strategy would appear to be drag it out as long as possible. Article in USA Today

 

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/celebrities/2021/08/11/prince-andrews-legal-options-epstein-accuser-virginia-giuffre-lawsuit/5557425001/

 

Found this paragraph particularly galling, especially the part I have highlighted. It is 2021 isn't it?

 

That's not going to happen because Andrew can't be forced to participate in an American proceeding. He can't be extradited because it's a civil lawsuit, not criminal charges. As a "prince of full blood," he could claim sovereign immunity, which could take years to resolve if challenged, Stephens says

Is this so very different from the UK being unable to try the US diplomats wife who killed someone while driving on the wrong side of the road (allegedly). No time for any of the royals but America would have a cheek to get on a high horse about this given its own approach to extraditing its nationals.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
indianajones
57 minutes ago, jack D and coke said:

Wonder if this is right enough…

49426F4C-4583-4F56-9B26-342472F3AA06.jpeg

 

Fingers crossed. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
JackLadd

He'll just hide in his grace and favour mansion. Somehow doubt we'll see him extradited. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
A Boy Named Crow
4 hours ago, Francis Albert said:

Choose?

Yes, the royal family got where they are by force,  but they stay there by consent. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
FinnBarr Saunders
58 minutes ago, A Boy Named Crow said:

Yes, the royal family got where they are by force,  but they stay there by consent. 

 

I didn't vote for them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, jack D and coke said:

Wonder if this is right enough…

49426F4C-4583-4F56-9B26-342472F3AA06.jpeg

And if Priti Patel ignores, it gets ignored.

 

Then Michael Give ignores, then the next HS.

Link to post
Share on other sites
A Boy Named Crow
1 hour ago, FinnBarr Saunders said:

 

I didn't vote for them.

Nope, nor did I, but if the majority of people wanted rid of them,  they'd be gone. Too many people are just happy to go along with it. 

 

I've heard before that if there was a popular vote to remove them,  they'd be able to stay in place with the support of the military. If that's true though,  that we have armed forces that would stand against the people to protect an unelected monarch who is in place by accident of birth,  we should disband the military and rebuilld it with an ethos not based on total ****wittery...

Link to post
Share on other sites
FinnBarr Saunders
21 minutes ago, A Boy Named Crow said:

Nope, nor did I, but if the majority of people wanted rid of them,  they'd be gone. Too many people are just happy to go along with it. 

 

I've heard before that if there was a popular vote to remove them,  they'd be able to stay in place with the support of the military. If that's true though,  that we have armed forces that would stand against the people to protect an unelected monarch who is in place by accident of birth,  we should disband the military and rebuilld it with an ethos not based on total ****wittery...

Agreed mate

Link to post
Share on other sites
Pasquale for King
On 11/08/2021 at 08:10, DETTY29 said:

While the Queen is alive, favourite son will be protected at all costs.

 

Charles who isn't popular, certainly compared to Elizabeth, or William however, may have a decision to make once ER2 departs to protect or transform the monarchy.

 

Unless they can find a way for The Mail or The Express to run a daily campaign for months put the blame on Meghan.  😉

Favourite son you say? Maybe his real dad is a nonce also, allegedly. 

https://www.harpersbazaar.com/culture/film-tv/a29752077/who-is-porchey-queen-elizabeth-ii-friend/

Edited by Pasquale for King
Link to post
Share on other sites
Savage Vince
9 hours ago, A Boy Named Crow said:

Nope, nor did I, but if the majority of people wanted rid of them,  they'd be gone. Too many people are just happy to go along with it. 

 

I've heard before that if there was a popular vote to remove them,  they'd be able to stay in place with the support of the military. If that's true though,  that we have armed forces that would stand against the people to protect an unelected monarch who is in place by accident of birth,  we should disband the military and rebuilld it with an ethos not based on total ****wittery...

 

I think the only way you'll remove these heinous vermin is by force. The French and the Russians had the right idea about so-called Royals. The servient British are a different breed altogether, it'll never happen here. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
A Boy Named Crow
2 hours ago, Savage Vince said:

 

I think the only way you'll remove these heinous vermin is by force. The French and the Russians had the right idea about so-called Royals. The servient British are a different breed altogether, it'll never happen here

That's what I meant in my earlier post,  there's something fundamentally broken about somebody who'd feel good about this arrangement. It's mental. 

Edited by A Boy Named Crow
Link to post
Share on other sites
Savage Vince
2 hours ago, A Boy Named Crow said:

That's what I meant in my earlier post,  there's something fundamentally broken about somebody who'd feel good about this arrangement. It's mental. 

 

Agreed. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Auldbenches

They said in one of the paper reviews this morning that he might go for diplomatic immunity.  Immunity from what if he hasn't done anything wrong?  

Just get his arese to the states and answer some questions.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
FinnBarr Saunders
6 hours ago, Auldbenches said:

They said in one of the paper reviews this morning that he might go for diplomatic immunity.  Immunity from what if he hasn't done anything wrong?  

Just get his arese to the states and answer some questions.  

 

Is he a diplomat?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Auldbenches
Just now, FinnBarr Saunders said:

 

Is he a diplomat?

I don't think he is but maybe his ma will do something. 

A bit if a coincidence that the story about the American hit and run woman came back into the headlines last week just as the headlines about the legal case against him started being discussed?  

Why ask for immunity if haven't done anything wrong?  

The queen also has this on her hands by not making him go to the states and help the FBI.   

Link to post
Share on other sites
Savage Vince
3 minutes ago, Auldbenches said:

The queen also has this on her hands by not making him go to the states and help the FBI.   

 

Big time. A very bad year for old Lizzie would get much much worse if they go down the diplomatic immunity road. This mob are nowhere near as loved as the media would have us believe. The bizarre respect she has is will hopefully disappear if that happens on her watch. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Auldbenches
Just now, Savage Vince said:

 

Big time. A very bad year for old Lizzie would get much much worse if they go down the diplomatic immunity road. This mob are nowhere near as loved as the media would have us believe. The bizarre respect she has is will hopefully disappear if that happens on her watch. 

This will have a huge impact on her, and the rest of them, if he manages to wriggle out of this. 

Any respect anyone had for her should've went when it came to light she had 10 million in an offshore account.   How much does she need and what the **** does she and the others spend it on?

Charles is a greddy bassa as well.  

It's nothing but a money making machine for a few social retards. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Savage Vince
7 minutes ago, Auldbenches said:

This will have a huge impact on her, and the rest of them, if he manages to wriggle out of this. 

Any respect anyone had for her should've went when it came to light she had 10 million in an offshore account.   How much does she need and what the **** does she and the others spend it on?

Charles is a greddy bassa as well.  

It's nothing but a money making machine for a few social retards. 

 

She's got plenty more than that. All the land they acquire under the pretence of charity as well. Parasites. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Auldbenches
1 minute ago, Savage Vince said:

 

She's got plenty more than that. All the land they acquire under the pretence of charity as well. Parasites. 

It's the raw cash they go through.  Fergie ended up in 20 million debt and had to work on American tv to help pay it off.  That means she must've blown the money she had and an extra 20 million.   On ****ing what?  

Sadly their are millions still brain washed with this shite. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Jambo-Jimbo
40 minutes ago, Auldbenches said:

I don't think he is but maybe his ma will do something. 

A bit if a coincidence that the story about the American hit and run woman came back into the headlines last week just as the headlines about the legal case against him started being discussed?  

Why ask for immunity if haven't done anything wrong?  

The queen also has this on her hands by not making him go to the states and help the FBI.   

 

No need to go to the states, can be questioned via video link, besides I'm sure there is an FBI office in London, so there is absolutely no excuse whatsoever not to help the FBI in their enquiries.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Auldbenches
24 minutes ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

No need to go to the states, can be questioned via video link, besides I'm sure there is an FBI office in London, so there is absolutely no excuse whatsoever not to help the FBI in their enquiries.

The only excuse/reason that he won't help is guilt.  I hope Maxwell squeals and brings the lot of them down.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...