Prince Andrew

[Windsor 2,233]

1 minute ago, The Old Crem said:

What happens if the lawsuit gets dismissed as it looks like it will be. Will he return to the public life. I could see him pushing for it and some of the press supporting it. 

I think they would then move to discredit what’s her face.

 

There are a few issues with her testimony and there’s only so much you can put down to trauma. 
 

he’s still a muppet though. 

[The Old Crem 3,583]

32 minutes ago, Windsor said:

I think they would then move to discredit what’s her face.

 

There are a few issues with her testimony and there’s only so much you can put down to trauma. 
 

he’s still a muppet though. 

I think they would have to be positive about him not negative about her to rebuild him.

 

The interview is very damaging in its self for him. Pizza Express and sweating are just so hard to believe it’s hard to come back from. 

[the_engineer 1,415]

We all know that judge will be dismissing the civil case against him.

[maryportfuncity 10,646]

1 minute ago, The Old Crem said:

I think they would have to be positive about him not negative about her to rebuild him

 

 

Yeah, which is a stretch when all his legal moves are about process (i.e. questioning her right to put this case in front of this court), none of his defence has been tested under cross examination and the media are happy to keep producing the same old photos and allegations. He was undoubtedly at Epstein's house, on his plane, on his island and hanging with a (now) dead paedo and the convicted Ghislaine. Quite how a 61 year old royal who is - basically - a spare as far as the manpower the family need to perform their constitutional duties comes back, assuming the case is not accepted in the US court is a big question. If his lawyers can't stop it being heard - I'd say he will start sweating noticably. 

[maryportfuncity 10,646]

5 minutes ago, the_engineer said:

We all know that judge will be dismissing the civil case against him.

 

 

Well...

 

We don't know that and there are some grounds for thinking it might go to court. Firstly, a New York court might take  the view that Epstein's mob were breaking the law with the agreement and therefore hold  that the crimes are sufficiently serious that they'll disregard an agreement struck in Florida. If Epstein were alive they could drag him into court over that, since he isn't they could just lay it aside and get on with the case (though Andrew's lawyers would immediately start arguing other angles to stop it). In any case, some alleged crimes took place outside of the US, on Epstein's island. Andrew himself denies he had anything to do with Roberts/Giuffre and the information he's given in public doesn't agree with  the testimony that convinced a jury last week where Ghislaine was concerned, in particulare the stuff about her role as a fixer for Epstein now looks bad for Andrew when he spent time in the Newsnight interview distancing himself from Eptstein by describing him as a "plus one" when Andrew invited his good friend Ghislaine to hang out. 

 

 

 

 

 

[The Old Crem 3,583]

Also reporting about Andrew’s lawyers arguing it’s unconstitutional to have a law extending the time that people that can sue for Damages for being an alleged victim won’t help matters for him if he does try and return. 

[the_engineer 1,415]

4 hours ago, maryportfuncity said:

 

 

Well...

 

We don't know that and there are some grounds for thinking it might go to court. Firstly, a New York court might take  the view that Epstein's mob were breaking the law with the agreement and therefore hold  that the crimes are sufficiently serious that they'll disregard an agreement struck in Florida. If Epstein were alive they could drag him into court over that, since he isn't they could just lay it aside and get on with the case (though Andrew's lawyers would immediately start arguing other angles to stop it). In any case, some alleged crimes took place outside of the US, on Epstein's island. Andrew himself denies he had anything to do with Roberts/Giuffre and the information he's given in public doesn't agree with  the testimony that convinced a jury last week where Ghislaine was concerned, in particulare the stuff about her role as a fixer for Epstein now looks bad for Andrew when he spent time in the Newsnight interview distancing himself from Eptstein by describing him as a "plus one" when Andrew invited his good friend Ghislaine to hang out. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Realistically and theoretically could the queen step in or have any influence?

[maryportfuncity 10,646]

14 minutes ago, the_engineer said:

 

Realistically and theoretically could the queen step in or have any influence?

 

 

OOooohhh, a nonegenarian sheilding a (reputed) nonce, not exactly the monarchy's finest hour if she does!

 

BBC tea time was interesting tonight, apparently there's a section in that massive agreement re Roberts/Giuffre and Epstein that - basically - means the agreement is only enforced if one of them enforces it. Epstein can't because he's dead, she won't because she wants Andrew in court. You suspect the purpose of that clause originally was to give Epstein power (if any of his peers were facing prosecution he could have stepped in to stop it and they'd have owed him majorly as a result). 

 

This could get REALLY messy

[Windsor 2,233]

42 minutes ago, the_engineer said:

 

Realistically and theoretically could the queen step in or have any influence?

For the third time today. Nasty accident…possibly Paris etc. 

 

The thing is, there isn’t actually any evidence that he pumped her. It’s just that Prince Andrew seems determined to convince us all that he’s a dodgy bastard. 
 

I’m also going to be very un-PC and say I don’t have much confidence in the victim. She looks like a conniving bitch and her lawyers are of the Ilk who believe what the woman says even if all other evidence tells us the victim is possibly spinning stories to top up her bank account. 

[the_engineer 1,415]

19 minutes ago, maryportfuncity said:

 

 

OOooohhh, a nonegenarian sheilding a (reputed) nonce, not exactly the monarchy's finest hour if she does!

 

BBC tea time was interesting tonight, apparently there's a section in that massive agreement re Roberts/Giuffre and Epstein that - basically - means the agreement is only enforced if one of them enforces it. Epstein can't because he's dead, she won't because she wants Andrew in court. You suspect the purpose of that clause originally was to give Epstein power (if any of his peers were facing prosecution he could have stepped in to stop it and they'd have owed him majorly as a result). 

 

This could get REALLY messy

 

I think she'd do it .

 

Certainly could , thanks for getting me up-to-date. Still wonder if any others are going to be brought in ? Bill Clinton , Peter mandelson and Chris tucker were allegedly flying on the Lolita express.

[Grim Up North 3,725]

1 minute ago, the_engineer said:

Peter mandelson

 

Not sure the Lolita Express would have been of much interest - maybe the Lenny Star but I'm not sure that was in Epstein's fleet.

[Toast 16,136]

24 minutes ago, Windsor said:

I’m also going to be very un-PC and say I don’t have much confidence in the victim. She looks like a conniving bitch and her lawyers are of the Ilk who believe what the woman says even if all other evidence tells us the victim is possibly spinning stories to top up her bank account. 

 

I've posted this before.  Long read, but casts some light over the character of the plaintiff.

https://vote-watch.com/2021/07/06/prince-andrew-the-shocking-truth/

[maryportfuncity 10,646]

Another day, another front page that does nowt to help the big lad's return to public life

 

[maryportfuncity 10,646]

Today's DM front page - in other news, the bill for laxatives at Windsor Castle has been greatly reduced of late

 

[Toast 16,136]

Surely shagging her in London wasn't a crime?  She was 17, which is above the legal age of consent here in the UK.

They need to find proof that it happened elsewhere.

[TQR 14,387]

3 minutes ago, Toast said:

Surely shagging her in London wasn't a crime?  She was 17, which is above the legal age of consent here in the UK.

They need to find proof that it happened elsewhere.

The age isn’t a crime if it only happened in the UK, but knowing Epstein was a sex trafficker, that some of these girls may not have been entirely willing and/or that one of these girls (Virginia) was one he’d arranged to sleep with, that is a crime.

[Toast 16,136]

7 minutes ago, TQR said:

The age isn’t a crime if it only happened in the UK, but knowing Epstein was a sex trafficker, that some of these girls may not have been entirely willing and/or that one of these girls (Virginia) was one he’d arranged to sleep with, that is a crime.

 

Yes, like I said they need to prove it.   The London incident alone wouldn't be enough.  And from that report, it's still only hearsay - the "witness" only knows what the plaintiff told her.

Don't get me wrong, I'm no fan of Andrew, and I think he's handled all this very badly in his usual arrogant fashion.  But I don't trust the plaintiff either.

[TQR 14,387]

3 minutes ago, Toast said:

Yes, like I said they need to prove it. The London incident alone wouldn't be enough.

Andrew needs to be pulled in for extensive questioning immediately.

 

If it’s beyond reasonable doubt that he knew Epstein was a trafficker, he’ll be done for withholding his knowledge of the sex trafficking racket. If (heh) he slept with Virginia with this knowledge, he’ll also be done for that. If they delve into the details of the arrangement with her, he could also be caught out by the fact that the minimum age for prostitution is 18. And indeed if he slept with her in the States, he slept with someone underage.

 

ALL of this needs to be investigated thoroughly, not just because of Andrew, but of others who might well have been involved in a similar way…two ex-US presidents have had some accusations, for starters.

 

The fact that Andrew has thus far refused to cooperate, has done everything in his power to hide, and all he has provided is his disastrous appearance with Emily Maitlis, is deeply unnerving and suspicious.

[Toast 16,136]

2 minutes ago, TQR said:

The fact that Andrew has thus far refused to cooperate, has done everything in his power to hide, and all he has provided is his disastrous appearance with Emily Maitlis, is deeply unnerving and suspicious.

 

That's characteristic of him though.  He's reputed to be incredibly arrogant and entitled, and thinks the rest of us are little people who can be disregarded.

[Gooseberry Crumble 5,341]

I think whatever the truth of what went on or didn't between  Prince Andrew and Virginia  it is important to remember it is being pursued as a civil case not a criminal case .

[TQR 14,387]

Failed to get the case against him dismissed.

[RIP Wee Jum 1,559]

Just now, TQR said:

Failed to get the case against him dismissed.

 

The day just gets better

[maryportfuncity 10,646]

1 hour ago, RIP Wee Jum said:

 

The day just gets better

 

Well depends on who you are - there's likely celebs doing grip and grin shit all over the place promoting b-list brands and crying into their goody bags in the knowledge their efforts will generate no column inches in the tabloids tomorrow. 

 

But, yeah, for us ghouls - P-P-A-A-R-T-T-T-Y!!!!

 

[DCI Frank Burnside 3,887]

 

[YoungWillz 21,037]

Returns military affiliations and Royal patronages to the Queen. (BBC News Channel Live).