# Prince Andrew, Duke of York, named in underage 'sex slave' lawsuit



## editor (Jan 2, 2015)

Interesting story in the Indie, although this part is to be noted: "The prince is not a named party in the legal claim, and has not had any opportunity to respond to the allegations". 





> A woman has alleged that she was repeatedly forced to have sexual relations with Prince Andrew as part of a lawsuit that claims an American investment banker passed her around rich and powerful friends as a “sex slave” while she was still underage.
> 
> The accusation was made in a lawsuit brought by women who say they were exploited by Jeffrey Epstein, an American multi-millionaire who was convicted of soliciting sex with an underage girl in 2008, reports the Guardian.
> 
> ...


----------



## Dan U (Jan 2, 2015)

it's also posted in the long running thread on all things establishment/paedophile ring


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 2, 2015)

i thought this would be a story about prince andrew being named as an underage sex slave


----------



## laptop (Jan 2, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> i thought hoped this would be a story about prince andrew being named as an underage sex slave



Fixed.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 2, 2015)

laptop said:


> Fixed.


not really. you have yet to get to grips with the strikeout feature.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 2, 2015)

Which one is Prince Andrew again?


----------



## laptop (Jan 2, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> not really. you have yet to get to grips with the strikeout feature.



Typo in underline markup fixed.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 2, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> Which one is Prince Andrew again?


the one who wasn't killed in the falklands and who wasn't sucking fergie's toes.


----------



## marty21 (Jan 2, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> Which one is Prince Andrew again?


 was the spare to Chuck, but now is sliding down the table, probably number 6 now - likes golf


----------



## laptop (Jan 2, 2015)

Is absolutely not implicated in any financial misdemeanours.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 2, 2015)

marty21 said:


> was the spare to Chuck, but now is sliding down the table, probably number 6 now - likes golf


probably likes things we can't talk about too.


----------



## dessiato (Jan 2, 2015)

Lives in an ugly house with at least one crashed car round the back. (Unless he's finally got rid of them, it reminded me of an upscale breakers yard.)


----------



## marty21 (Jan 2, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> probably likes things we can't talk about too.


 golf first though - and we pay for him to fly to golf courses all over the world, where he like to play golf


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 2, 2015)

marty21 said:


> golf first though - and we pay for him to fly to golf courses all over the world, where he like to play golf


and probably other things.


----------



## Espresso (Jan 2, 2015)

How can he be named in the lawsuit when he's not named in the lawsuit?


----------



## Quartz (Jan 2, 2015)

How big was this guy's private jet? Because you couldn't get up to much in many of them as they're so small.

There's something else: in much of the Caribbean, the age of consent is 16, not 18. IIRC Andrew used to holiday there a lot, so any sex may have, in fact, been legal.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 2, 2015)

Quartz said:


> How big was this guy's private jet? Because you couldn't get up to much in many of them as they're so small.


do you think a member of the royal family would hobnob with people with small 'private jets'?



> There's something else: in much of the Caribbean, the age of consent is 16, not 18. IIRC Andrew used to holiday there a lot, so any sex may have, in fact, been legal.


if not consensual


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 2, 2015)

Espresso said:


> How can he be named in the lawsuit when he's not named in the lawsuit?


very easily. he may be someone named in the acts for which someone else is being sued, while not being sued (or suing) himself.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 2, 2015)

Espresso said:


> How can he be named in the lawsuit when he's not named in the lawsuit?


 Named, but not named party to the legal claim.


----------



## Espresso (Jan 2, 2015)

Thank you, Pickman's model and brogdale


----------



## Quartz (Jan 2, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> do you think a member of the royal family would hobnob with people with small 'private jets'?



Absolutely.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 2, 2015)

Fearless reporting from the state broadcaster...


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 2, 2015)

Espresso said:


> How can he be named in the lawsuit when he's not named in the lawsuit?



His name is on the paperwork but he's not named as a defendant.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 2, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> His name is on the paperwork but he's not named as a defendant.


keep up at the back


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 2, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Fearless reporting from the state broadcaster...



So no other information besides a farily predicatable denial from the royal PR department? How frightfully balanced of them


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 2, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> So no other information besides a farily predicatable denial from the royal PR department? How frightfully balanced of them


i see the denial is of any suggestion of impropriety, not of impropriety itself.


----------



## laptop (Jan 2, 2015)

Also named in the lawsuit (but not a participant in it) is "a well-known Prime Minister"...


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 2, 2015)

laptop said:


> Also named in the lawsuit (but not a participant in it) is "a well-known Prime Minister"...


oh no 

not stefan lotven


----------



## J Ed (Jan 2, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> Which one is Prince Andrew again?



The cunt


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jan 2, 2015)

J Ed said:


> The cunt


although that could mean any one of them


----------



## laptop (Jan 2, 2015)

Quartz said:


> There's something else: in much of the Caribbean, the age of consent is 16, not 18. IIRC Andrew used to holiday there a lot, so any sex may have, in fact, been legal.



Er... the lawsuit is filed in Florida.

Does Florida (or the US as a whole) have the same provision that British law now does: that anything that is a sexual offence here may be prosecuted here, wherever it was committed?

E2A: ALLEGEDly.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 2, 2015)

J Ed said:


> The cunt



Doesn't really matter, from now on I can just think of him as the ALLEGED paedophile.

And yes, the word ALLEGED will appear in sarcastic capital letters even when I'm only thinking it.


----------



## laptop (Jan 2, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> oh no
> 
> not stefan lotven



NOT Stefan *Löfven*


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 2, 2015)

laptop said:


> Er... the lawsuit is filed in Florida.
> 
> Does Florida (or the US as a whole) have the same provision that British law now does: that anything that is a sexual offence here may be prosecuted here, wherever it was committed?



I can't see the British government agreeing to extradite a prince to be honest, so it's probably a non-issue.


----------



## agricola (Jan 2, 2015)

One does wonder whether Captain Bob's (edit:  or at least his daughter's) involvement might make this link in with the investigation(s) over here; though of course this is just about the federal prosecutors agreeing a plea deal at this stage.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 2, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> i see the denial is of any suggestion of impropriety, not of impropriety itself.



Note also the redundant phrase 'underage minors'. Anyone would think someone was typing that statement in a terrible hurry.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 2, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> I can't see the British government agreeing to extradite a prince to be honest, so it's probably a non-issue.



Future travel to the US could be an issue?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 2, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Future travel to the US?



We'll just have to send one of the other royals over there to take advantage of the harems of the American elite, sorry I mean promote British industry.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 2, 2015)

Now the BBC's attempt at updating the story with "more details"...but still opening the piece with the denial...before the substance of the accusation.







Serious, concerned...and yet at the same time...innocent, benign face picture. Nice.


----------



## pogofish (Jan 2, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Future travel to the US could be an issue?



Do Royals have passports like the rest of us yet?  Last time I read anything (yonks ago) it was still a laissez-pass letter from the Maj herself?


----------



## elbows (Jan 2, 2015)

Just been reading dodgy Daily Mail stuff from when a version of this story broke in 2011. A Spitting Image puppet seems to feature in the story. Really.



> The Prince had been given a Spitting Image puppet of himself by Ghislaine, who was also present. Johanna was sitting on Andrew’s knee, and said Ghislaine made Virginia sit on his other knee.
> 
> Then, Johanna recalls, Ghislaine ‘put the puppet’s hand on Virginia’s breast, then Andrew put his hand on my breast’.



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...aughter-Ghislaine-hired-girls-paedophile.html


----------



## brogdale (Jan 2, 2015)

pogofish said:


> Do Royals have passports like the rest of us yet?  Last time I read anything it was still a laissez-pass letter from the Maj herself?


 Lizard-pass, shirley?


----------



## brogdale (Jan 2, 2015)

elbows said:


> Just been reading dodgy Daily Mail stuff from when a version of this story broke in 2011. A Spitting Image puppet seems to feature in the story. Really.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...aughter-Ghislaine-hired-girls-paedophile.html


'kinnel.


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 2, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> Which one is Prince Andrew again?



The one with financial ties to murky dictatorships. Who the press don't follow about as much.


----------



## Quartz (Jan 2, 2015)

elbows said:


> Just been reading dodgy Daily Mail stuff from when a version of this story broke in 2011. A Spitting Image puppet seems to feature in the story. Really.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...aughter-Ghislaine-hired-girls-paedophile.html



Wow.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 2, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> do you think a member of the royal family would hobnob with people with small 'private jets'?
> 
> 
> if not consensual



exactly. The allegation includes the word "forced"...that's not 'just' an allegation of sex with a floridian minor, is it?


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 2, 2015)

The grauniad article is full of stuff.  None of it prurient.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...rew-named-us-lawsuit-underage-sex-allegations

It would no doubt be quite easy for journos to check the places mentioned with the prince's travel details.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 2, 2015)

I want to know who the PM named is as well. I know which one leaps first to mind.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 2, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> I want to know who the PM named is as well. I know which one leaps first to mind.


well...we know they're "well known" for a start...


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 2, 2015)

I probably know... pause ...which one you mean.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 2, 2015)

brogdale said:


> well...we know they're "well known" for a start...


narrows it down


----------



## laptop (Jan 2, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> I want to know who the PM named is as well. I know which one leaps first to mind.



The _New York Daily News_ has a list from 2009. 

The one I think you're thinking of isn't on it.


----------



## hash tag (Jan 2, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> The one with financial ties to murky dictatorships. Who the press don't follow about as much.



"Financial ties", nothing to do with selling guns and assorted armanents?


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 2, 2015)

hash tag said:


> "Financial ties", nothing to do with selling guns and assorted armanents?



And back handers on the shit house he couldn't sell.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jan 2, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> The one with financial ties to murky dictatorships. Who the press don't follow about as much.



This is pretty funny in a fucked-up sort of way.


> One senior former diplomat said : "The coverage has been a bit unfair. He is a twat, but [on the Saudi BAE bribery case] he's right in the wrong way. The Saudis would have ended counter-terrorism cooperation with us completely, and that is absolutely vital.
> 
> "But Andrew is an idiot and puts it crudely, and it was wrong to suggest the bribery was acceptable."
> 
> ...


 http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2010/nov/30/prince-andrew-wikileaks-cables


----------



## agricola (Jan 2, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> I want to know who the PM named is as well. I know which one leaps first to mind.



One of our PMs?  Surely there is only one of those that noone would dare name.


----------



## laptop (Jan 2, 2015)

agricola said:


> One of our PMs?



Not the one mentioned by the _New York Daily News_. 

But still capable of suing for damage to reputation in the UK if named here (even though that's arguably a net negative). So let's not.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 2, 2015)

brogdale said:


> well...we know they're "well known" for a start...



Most prime ministers are fairly well known.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 2, 2015)

agricola said:


> One of our PMs?  Surely there is only one of those that noone would dare name.





SpookyFrank said:


> Most prime ministers are fairly well known.



Ironic adjective for journos to use for an individual they won't name.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jan 2, 2015)

lets hope it was 'miranda '


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 2, 2015)

laptop said:


> NOT Stefan *Löfven*


now there's a relief


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 2, 2015)

ruffneck23 said:


> lets hope it was 'miranda '


lots of people in the us have been miranda'd.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 2, 2015)

If I've got this right, the case we're talking about is an action against the US federal prosecutors for letting Epstein off with guilty plea on a minor charge?

The US plea-bargain system does seem pretty bizarre to me. It would seem to make the punishment you get proportional to your chances of beating a charge rather than the severity of your crimes. Ergo someone like Epstein who could presumably hire all the weapons-grade lawyers money can buy gets to take a minor charge because he would've maybe got away with it if charged with something that actually reflected the accusations against him.

e2a: Lots of Epstein's victims appear to have settled out of court. Another good route out of trouble that's not available to less wealthy nonces.


----------



## Buckaroo (Jan 2, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> If I've got this right, the case we're talking about is an action against the US federal prosecutors for letting Epstein off with guilty plea on a minor charge?
> 
> The US plea-bargain system does seem pretty bizarre to me. It would seem to make the punishment you get proportional to your chances of beating a charge rather than the severity of your crimes. Ergo someone like Epstein who could presumably hire all the weapons-grade lawyers money can buy gets to take a minor charge because he would've maybe got away with it if charged with something that actually reflected the accusations against him.




http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-celebrity-politics--and-royalty-9954397.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-celebrity-politics--and-royalty-9954397.html

“I’m not a sexual predator, I’m an ‘offender’,” he told the newspaper at the time. “It’s the difference between a murderer and a person who steals a bagel.”


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 2, 2015)

Buckaroo said:


> “I’m not a sexual predator, I’m an ‘offender’,”





You've committed the offence of being a sexual predator from where I'm standing mate.


----------



## twentythreedom (Jan 2, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Future travel to the US could be an issue?


I'm sure if he keeps his mouth shut about it at US border immigration he'll get through ok


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 2, 2015)

Andrew has some poor cunt on the payroll who struggles off his flights after him carrying the trouser press. Nothing humble about his entitlement. Proper wanker.


----------



## laptop (Jan 2, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> If I've got this right, the case we're talking about is an action against the US federal prosecutors for letting Epstein off with guilty plea on a minor charge?



I think it's a *civil* case for compensation, with the added twist of a side-case calling for release of papers - presumably damaging to Epstein - that would have been in the public domain if Epstein had gone to full *criminal* trial but are not, yet, because of the plea-bargain.



SpookyFrank said:


> The US plea-bargain system does seem pretty bizarre to me. It would seem to make the punishment you get proportional to your chances of beating a charge rather than the severity of your crimes. Ergo someone like Epstein who could presumably hire all the weapons-grade lawyers money can buy gets to take a minor charge because he would've maybe got away with it if charged with something that actually reflected the accusations against him.



Yes.



SpookyFrank said:


> e2a: Lots of Epstein's victims appear to have settled out of court. Another good route out of trouble that's not available to less wealthy nonces.



Indeed. And a good reason for making maximum publicity if you're up against someone who can pay substantial compensation...


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 2, 2015)

No matter what evidence may appear, the chances of Andrew getting in any actual trouble must be in the very low zeroes though right? The royal family could never survive having a convicted nonce as one of their number could they?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 2, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> No matter what evidence may appear, the chances of Andrew getting in any actual trouble must be in the very low zeroes though right? The royal family could never survive having a convicted nonce as one of their number could they?


i don't see why not, unless they all hang themselves in shame.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 2, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> No matter what evidence may appear, the chances of Andrew getting in any actual trouble must be in the very low zeroes though right? The royal family could never survive having a convicted nonce as one of their number could they?



No, but I bet his father is turning in his grave.


----------



## laptop (Jan 2, 2015)

brogdale said:


> No, but I bet his father is turning in his grave.



Eh? Pre-empting the death pool?

Ah. 

Trust the Torygraph to excel in _lèse-majesté_: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1471019/Portrait-of-a-marriage.html


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 2, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> I want to know who the PM named is as well. I know which one leaps first to mind.


*rubs chin*


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 2, 2015)

BBC radio news also leading with, '*PRINCE ANDREW DENIES* allegations of noncery'

They're so pathetically transparent in their arse-covering these days


----------



## Buckaroo (Jan 2, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> BBC radio news also leading with, '*PRINCE ANDREW DENIES* allegations of noncery'
> 
> They're so pathetically transparent in their arse-covering these days



This from 2011


Annie lennox "Disreputable past"= convicted nonce


----------



## brogdale (Jan 2, 2015)

nino_savatte said:


> *rubs chin*


 
Yep, that Spencer Compton always looked a wrong'un.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 2, 2015)

"Rum characters" for fuck's sake 

 Epstein isn't a man you'd hesitate to buy a second hand car off, he's a man who should by rights be rotting in jail for considerably longer than the term of his natural life.


----------



## killer b (Jan 2, 2015)

Buckaroo said:


> Annie lennox "Disreputable past"= convicted nonce


oh, come on. she was being sarcastic.


----------



## Zabo (Jan 2, 2015)

We must be fair. Remember the 'victim' must always be heard but not in this instance.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 2, 2015)

Zabo said:


> We must be fair. Remember the 'victim' must always be heard but not in this instance.



Yeah but in this case the victim's claims are utterly baseless because...well beacause the chap being accused bloody well says so. He's a thoroughly respectable sort of chap with the most excellent breeding and whatever he says should be bloody well good enough for anyone.


----------



## Buckaroo (Jan 2, 2015)

killer b said:


> oh, come on. she was being sarcastic.



Was she? She seemed to be to be saying "Oh come on, he meets loads of people, how can he be held responsible for everything they do?" Downplaying the allegations at the time, moving on, going forward etc. Not sarcasm. Unless you're being sarcastic in which case


----------



## killer b (Jan 2, 2015)

No, shes being sarcastic. Seriously.  'slightly disreputable past', when talking about a convicted nonce, is sarcasm. Especially when said in that tone of voice.


----------



## Zabo (Jan 2, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> Yeah but in this case the victim's claims are utterly baseless because...well beacause the chap being accused bloody well says so. He's a thoroughly respectable sort of chap with the most excellent breeding and whatever he says should be bloody well good enough for anyone.



Indeed. Quite right Frank.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 2, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> Yeah but in this case the victim's claims are utterly baseless because...well beacause the chap being accused bloody well says so. He's a thoroughly respectable sort of chap with the most excellent breeding and whatever he says should be bloody well good enough for anyone.


 
Certainly what the BBC is saying.


----------



## Fez909 (Jan 2, 2015)

The PM mentioned is probably not a British PM as this article has them as "head of state".

Narrows it down quite a lot, now, I think. Especially with the list posted earlier.

edit: no, it doesn't actually, does it? I don't think the PM is "head of state" in any country? Must be a mistake in this report.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 2, 2015)

I mean some establishment figure denying wrongdoing is hardly news is it? Max Clifford is probably still denying that he did anything wrong, and desperately trying to find a good publicist to help him clear his name...


----------



## Buckaroo (Jan 3, 2015)

killer b said:


> No, shes being sarcastic. Seriously.  'slightly disreputable past', when talking about a convicted nonce, is sarcasm. Especially when said in that tone of voice.



Well then if she was being sarcastic she's a fucking disgrace. Did you listen to the rest of it? The  banker man is a convicted child abuser, suspected of procuring and sexually exploiting 40 children for celebrities, politicians, royalty and that business class of cunts for years. 'Slightly disreputable past' isn't sarcasm in any tone of voice. Vested interests all round. Fear maybe but not sarcasm.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 3, 2015)

What's that, Annie Lennox _OBE_?


----------



## Buckaroo (Jan 3, 2015)

Wilf said:


> What's that, Annie Lennox _OBE_?



Yeah, take it all back.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 3, 2015)

Buckaroo said:


> Yeah, take it all back.


What, the Annie Lennox who performed at the Queen's Diamond Jubilee Concert?

... and said the royals should be given their privacy:
http://www.express.co.uk/news/showb...mbarded-with-abuse-over-royal-family-comments


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jan 3, 2015)

sorry for the fail link but

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...aire-paedophile-friend-visit-Sandringham.html


eta didnt realise the article is over 3 yrs old, so might not be relevant


----------



## TopCat (Jan 3, 2015)

FUcking nonce...


----------



## Tankus (Jan 3, 2015)

Just pondering .......but "air miles" Andy has been keeping a seemingly remarkably low public profile since 2011ish..


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 3, 2015)

Didn't he get his 'special envoy to business' role removed around that time? For other reasons though iirc.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 3, 2015)

He relinquished the role.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 3, 2015)

TopCat said:


> He relinquished the role.



Happened to coincide with the coalition's creation of the Sovereign Support Grant, (Osborne giving them even more loot from the asset-bubble proceeds from the "crown" estates). So why would the royals needs to pursue backhanders from other despots?


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 3, 2015)

But wasn't it down to some scandal or other or am I misremembering?


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 3, 2015)

It might just have been to do with him selling his house actually which apparently remains unlived in.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 3, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> But wasn't it down to some scandal or other or am I misremembering?


 Same story, I think...being mates with the released nonce and putting him up at his mother's place in Norfolk etc.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 3, 2015)

Yeah it was because he remained good friends with his rapist mate.


----------



## FNG (Jan 3, 2015)

yep Epstien paid 2million over the asking price for Andrews house, he also seperately cleared some of fergies debt


----------



## friedaweed (Jan 3, 2015)

Wilf said:


> What, the Annie Lennox who performed at the Queen's Diamond Jubilee Concert?
> 
> ... and said the royals should be given their privacy:
> http://www.express.co.uk/news/showb...mbarded-with-abuse-over-royal-family-comments


Yup she's never been a thorn in the side of the up-the-aristocracy


----------



## youngian (Jan 3, 2015)

FNG said:


> yep Epstien paid 2million over the asking price for Andrews house, he also seperately cleared some of fergies debt


This story rings a bell but wasn't the buyer some shady central Asian trust fund based in the Caymens and the house is lying empty rotting?



TopCat said:


> FUcking nonce...


Depending on where the alleged offence took place, he's a nonce if its Florida but not London.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 3, 2015)

youngian said:


> This story rings a bell but wasn't the buyer some shady central Asian trust fund based in the Caymens and the house is lying empty rotting?
> 
> 
> Depending on where the alleged offence took place, he's a nonce if its Florida but not London.


She said she was forced to have sex with him. That's rape anywhere in the world.


----------



## FNG (Jan 3, 2015)

number crunching num


youngian said:


> This story rings a bell but wasn't the buyer some shady central Asian trust fund based in the Caymens and the house is lying empty rotting?
> 
> 
> Depending on where the alleged offence took place, he's a nonce if its Florida but not London.



baby sitting at mo i see if i can brows it later


----------



## newbie (Jan 3, 2015)

this sets out some of the case against Andrew, including the "_sale of his home in Berkshire to a Kazakh tycoon, Timur Kulibayev, for £15 million: £3 million over the asking price, although there hadn't been a single prospective buyer in three years. It now sits unoccupied and in mounting disrepair, suggesting that the property, curiously, isn't particularly essential to Mr Kulibayev's portfolio._"

This is the background to the allegations in the news atm


----------



## youngian (Jan 3, 2015)

Yes it is sounding like Dominic Strauss-Khan with a trinket


----------



## newbie (Jan 3, 2015)

I'd forgotten DSK but was reading up to see why there is too much similarity between Epstein and Berlesconi for comfort.


----------



## Quartz (Jan 3, 2015)

TopCat said:


> She said she was forced to have sex with him. That's rape anywhere in the world.



Serious question: if person A forces person B to have sex with person C, but C does not know about the forcing, is C the rapist or is A?

Historically, of course, the host sending a slave / floozie / member of his harem to _entertain _the honoured guest was pretty standard in much of the world.


----------



## Quartz (Jan 3, 2015)

youngian said:


> Yes it is sounding like Dominic Strauss-Khan with a trinket



Wasn't DSK vindicated?


----------



## newbie (Jan 3, 2015)

_"In the aftermath of the New York arrest other allegations were made. During the case, the journalist Tristane Banon came forward with a claim that Strauss-Kahn had attempted to rape her. In September Banon stated that if there is no criminal prosecution, she would bring a civil case against Strauss-Kahn.[79] According to a report in L'Express Strauss-Kahn admitted to attempting to kiss Banon.[80] In October the French public prosecutors dropped the investigation. They stated that there was a lack of evidence regarding the allegation of attempted rape.[81][82] In March 2012, Strauss-Kahn came under investigation in France over his alleged involvement in a prostitution ring. The allegations relate to his supposed involvement in hiring prostitutes for sex parties at hotels in Lille, Paris and Washington.[83] On 2 October 2012, a French prosecutor announced that they will not continue the investigation of Strauss-Kahn's connection to a possible gang rape in Washington, D.C..[84]


On 26 July 2013, French prosecutors announced that Strauss-Kahn was to stand trial concerning allegations of "aggravated pimping" at the Carlton hotel in Lille.[85] In 2014, the trial was reported to be scheduled for 2015.[45]"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominique_Strauss-Kahn#Personal_life_


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 3, 2015)

Quartz said:


> Wasn't DSK vindicated?


What does vindication consist of?


----------



## newbie (Jan 3, 2015)

Quartz said:


> Serious question: if person A forces person B to have sex with person C, but C does not know about the forcing, is C the rapist or is A?
> 
> Historically, of course, the host sending a slave / floozie / member of his harem to _entertain _the honoured guest was pretty standard in much of the world.


for which reason anyone in those circles ought to have a clue.  Both, I'd say.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 3, 2015)

Quartz said:


> Serious question: if person A forces person B to have sex with person C, but C does not know about the forcing, is C the rapist or is A?
> 
> Historically, of course, the host sending a slave / floozie / member of his harem to _entertain _the honoured guest was pretty standard in much of the world.


Why do you think rapist need be singular?


----------



## youngian (Jan 3, 2015)

Quartz said:


> Historically, of course, the host sending a slave / floozie / member of his harem to _entertain _the honoured guest was pretty standard in much of the world.



One of those irregular verbs; One hosts, you pimp

Telegraph moonbats see things differently
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/...161/Our-less-than-grand-old-Duke-of-York.html


> anyoldiron • 4 years ago
> This Country will need the Monarchy when it comes out of the European Union Jenny. Or perhaps you want your own Country completely destroyed, for the
> Localism Bill is set to divide and break up England especially, and yes it started its journey from the EU, along with the 2011 Census form, and the High Speed rail ( The EU's TEN-T)
> 
> ...


----------



## Wilf (Jan 3, 2015)

newbie said:


> for which reason anyone in those circles ought to have a clue.  Both, I'd say.


I'd agree, though I suspect Andrew will use this ('I didn't know') in the unlikely event there's a serious investigation into his actions.  He really is a vile, vile scumbag.


----------



## killer b (Jan 3, 2015)

Quartz said:


> Serious question: if person A forces person B to have sex with person C, but C does not know about the forcing, is C the rapist or is A?


the questions which occupy your mind are pretty revolting.


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 3, 2015)

'Unwittingly'. The Mark Thatcher defence.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 3, 2015)

killer b said:


> the questions which occupy your mind are pretty revolting.


Indeed. _Wriggle room_ shouldn't be where you come in on this story.


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 3, 2015)

Quartz said:


> Serious question: if person A forces person B to have sex with person C, but C does not know about the forcing, is C the rapist or is A?



Everyone who didn't get consent is the rapist.


----------



## killer b (Jan 3, 2015)

Wilf said:


> Indeed. _Wriggle room_ shouldn't be where you come in on this story.


His questions on threads like this are always a variation on _how do we protect the men_.


----------



## newbie (Jan 3, 2015)

no, don't think so. The totality of the circumstances are wider than simple consent- that's Andrews wriggle room.


----------



## FNG (Jan 3, 2015)

here it is more of a go between than purchasor


> The Duke of York stayed at the townhouse, just off Central Park, for four days one Christmas. Epstein lent his former wife Sarah Ferguson £15,000 when she got into financial difficulties. Both the Prince and Mandelson know Kazakh socialite and businesswoman Goga Ashkenazi: she is alleged to have introduced Andrew to Timur Kulibayev, the man who bought Prince Andrew’s former marital home, Sunninghill, at £3million above the asking price. That’s fifteen million Pounds. Ashkenazi too has multiple entries in the contact file of paedophile pimp Jeffrey Epstein.


----------



## Quartz (Jan 3, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Everyone who didn't get consent is the rapist.



Perfect answer.


----------



## Quartz (Jan 3, 2015)

killer b said:


> His questions on threads like this are always a variation on _how do we protect the men_.



I believe in equality. I have placed myself in harm's way on behalf of both men and women; have you?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 3, 2015)

Quartz said:


> I believe in equality. I have placed myself in harm's way on behalf of both men and women; have you?



This makes perfect sense. Or it would do, if we lived in a world where men and women were at equal risk from violence, abuse and systematic injustices.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 3, 2015)

Wilf said:


> I'd agree, though I suspect Andrew will use this ('I didn't know') in the unlikely event there's a serious investigation into his actions.  He really is a vile, vile scumbag.


 Unlikely, yes...but despite Dershowitz's strident defence of Andrew Windsor, his very vocal calls for the claimant to make her allegations publicly, outside of the 'privilege' of the legal statement, could backfire very spectacularly for those accused. _If _she was to do what Dershowitz is calling for, the house of Windsor would then have to face the prospect of a legal response to clear Andrew's name.


----------



## killer b (Jan 3, 2015)

Quartz said:


> I believe in equality. I have placed myself in harm's way on behalf of both men and women; have you?


what does this even mean?


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 3, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Unlikely, yes...but despite Dershowitz's strident defence of Andrew Windsor, his very vocal calls for the claimant to make her allegations publicly, outside of the 'privilege' of the legal statement, could backfire very spectacularly for those accused. _If _she was to do what Dershowitz is calling for, the house of Windsor would then have to face the prospect of a legal response to clear Andrew's name.


It's interesting that Dershowitz is the one that's all over the media defending Andrew . Anyone who has followed his defence of the state of Israel's actions will know that Dershowitz finds ways of excusing, ignoring or denying some very nasty stuff. He has said, for example, incidents for which there is photographic evidence didn't happen.


----------



## laptop (Jan 3, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> It's interesting that Dershowitz is the one that's all over the media defending Andrew . Anyone who has followed his defence of the state of Israel's actions will know that Dershowitz finds ways of excusing, ignoring or denying some very nasty stuff. He has said, for example, incidents for which there is photographic evidence didn't happen.



Now all the prince needs is a character reference from Max Clifford...


----------



## Knotted (Jan 3, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> It's interesting that Dershowitz is the one that's all over the media defending Andrew . Anyone who has followed his defence of the state of Israel's actions will know that Dershowitz finds ways of excusing, ignoring or denying some very nasty stuff. He has said, for example, incidents for which there is photographic evidence didn't happen.



Dershowitz is implicated as well. He's defending himself.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/under...els-sex-claims-at-alan-dershowitz-200495.html


----------



## brogdale (Jan 3, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> It's interesting that Dershowitz is the one that's all over the media defending Andrew . Anyone who has followed his defence of the state of Israel's actions will know that Dershowitz finds ways of excusing, ignoring or denying some very nasty stuff. He has said, for example, incidents for which there is photographic evidence didn't happen.



Yes, his performance on this morning's R4 'Today' programme is well worth listening to. From 1.32.20..

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04wnkcs



> *...I don't know this woman...*





> ...*I was not at the places, at the times*....





> ...*I want to see this played out...in the court of law...*





> ...*the lawyers and clients conspired to create a false story...*





> *...I have never been alone with Prince Andrew...*





> ...*I have never been at a party with women with Prince Andrew... *





> ....*I have never been alone with Jeffery Epstein and Prince Andrew, no..never*...



Fascinating to see what admissions he avoided, and those he was anxious to establish. All this never been alone shite...don't suppose you would be alone at an (alleged) "party" where consensual sex with minors was the main attraction.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 3, 2015)

Knotted said:


> Dershowitz is implicated as well. He's defending himself.
> http://www.politico.com/blogs/under...els-sex-claims-at-alan-dershowitz-200495.html


I'm aware of that. What I'm saying is that he's a proven liar in other arenas. And therefore not someone who adds credibility to Andrew's defence.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 3, 2015)

laptop said:


> Now all the prince needs is a character reference from Max Clifford...


 Clifford has worked for those 'close' to Andrew Windsor....(Daily Mail link I'm afraid)...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbi...-Andrews-yacht-beauty-meets-Max-Clifford.html


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 3, 2015)

The BBC's handling of this is appalling. Of course Andrew is innocent until proven otherwise, but they've seen their role as to defend Andrew and traduce the alleged victim. That's how power works. That's the disparity right there. 

The BBC ought to be stating the bald facts. But that's not their style.


----------



## Quartz (Jan 3, 2015)

newbie said:


> _"In the aftermath of the New York arrest other allegations were made._



But in the New York case DSK was vindicated, wasn't he?


----------



## killer b (Jan 3, 2015)

the complainant's reputation was savaged beyond any hope of a fair trial, certainly.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 3, 2015)

Quartz said:


> But in the New York case DSK was vindicated, wasn't he?


What does vindication consist of?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 3, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> What does vindication consist of?


a bunch of men saying another man didn't do something


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 3, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> The BBC's handling of this is appalling. Of course Andrew is innocent until proven otherwise, but they've seen their role as to defend Andrew and traduce the alleged victim. That's how power works. That's the disparity right there.
> 
> The BBC ought to be stating the bald facts. But that's not their style.


I agree, but they do have a profile of him on their front page at the moment. It's the kind of thing that attempts even-handedness, but it does still accuse him sideways-like of being an idiot, a corrupt sponger and a chancer. 

He's that most dangerous kind of idiot - and idiot who doesn't think he's an idiot. I kind of hope he stays in the spotlight - it's this kind of idiot royal attempting to exercise power who could do a lot of damage to the royal family.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 3, 2015)

laptop said:


> Now all the prince needs is a character reference from Max Clifford...


or a famous pop star


----------



## Santino (Jan 3, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> It's interesting that Dershowitz is the one that's all over the media defending Andrew . Anyone who has followed his defence of the state of Israel's actions will know that Dershowitz finds ways of excusing, ignoring or denying some very nasty stuff. He has said, for example, incidents for which there is photographic evidence didn't happen.


Is he friendly with any former Prime Ministers of Israel?


----------



## TopCat (Jan 3, 2015)

Quartz said:


> But in the New York case DSK was vindicated, wasn't he?


No.


----------



## newbie (Jan 3, 2015)

Quartz said:


> But in the New York case DSK was vindicated, wasn't he?



only if you're trying really, really hard to see it from his pov. 

from the same wiki article as before "_After completing a lengthy investigation, prosecutors filed a motion to drop all charges against Strauss-Kahn, stating that they were not convinced of his culpability beyond a reasonable doubt due to serious issues in the complainant's credibility and inconclusive physical evidence, and therefore could not ask a jury to believe in it.[73][74] The motion was granted by Judge Obus in a hearing on August 23, 2011.[75][76] In a TV interview in September, Strauss-Kahn admitted that his liaison with Diallo was a moral fault and described it as "inappropriate" but that it did not involve violence, constraint or aggression. He said that Diallo had lied about the encounter and that he had no intention of negotiating with her over a civil suit she had filed against him.[77] Strauss-Kahn later reached a settlement with Diallo for an undisclosed amount over the civil suit.[78]"_

the chancer will be similarly _vindicated_ for those that try really, really hard.


----------



## Knotted (Jan 3, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> I'm aware of that. What I'm saying is that he's a proven liar in other arenas. And therefore not someone who adds credibility to Andrew's defence.



Norman Finkelstein on Alan Dershowitz's methods and why he makes for a successful defence lawyer.


Spoiler




[\spoiler]


----------



## brogdale (Jan 3, 2015)

Unsurprisingly, Dacre appears to be enjoying all the sordid details,  but his latest copy includes some notable comments...(I'll quote so I don't have to link to the filthy rag)...



> *Until now, it has always been reported that there was no evidence Andrew was aware that his host was paying children for sex.*
> 
> Indeed, the Daily Mail has previously stressed that none of the claims about the prince has been corroborated, and that they have yet to be tested in a court of law.*But some Buckingham Palace courtiers were in despair yesterday that the Royal Family has been dragged further into the Epstein mire.*
> 
> ...


----------



## brogdale (Jan 3, 2015)

The Mail is also following the story of Andrew's alleged involvement in lobbying US authorities to be lenient with his mucker Epstein.



> A Buckingham Palace spokesman has *denied claims Prince Andrew lobbied the US government against the prosecution of his long-term friend Jeffrey Epstein - the US billionaire paedophile.*
> 
> The allegation comes as court papers emerged which also sensationally claim the royal abused an underage girl at an orgy where she was being used as a 'sex slave'.



Part of the court document filed, pictured above, demanding the American government be ordered by the federal court to hand over correspondence which the women’s lawyers claim will show Prince Andrew and Dershowitz lobbied against Epstein being prosecuted:-


----------



## Knotted (Jan 3, 2015)

Knotted said:


> Dershowitz is implicated as well. He's defending himself.
> http://www.politico.com/blogs/under...els-sex-claims-at-alan-dershowitz-200495.html





> The federal investigation obtained manifests for Epstein’s private jet travel, but prosecutors never charged anyone besides the investor with involvement in obtaining or using underaged girls for sexual purposes.
> 
> The new court filing says this result is in part due to the fact that Epstein’s legal team—which included such heavyweights as former independent counsel and solicitor general Ken Starr, trial lawyer Roy Black, and Dershowitz—negotiated a deal that precluded the feds charging anyone as a co-conspirator.
> 
> ...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 3, 2015)

Knotted said:


> Norman Finkelstein on Alan Dershowitz's methods and why he makes for a successful defence lawyer.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> ...



Reminds me of Tony Blair. Maybe Finkelstein isn't used to debating with lawyers. There's no real point debating with lawyers, tbh.


----------



## Knotted (Jan 3, 2015)

> Epstein mounted an aggressive counterinvestigation. Epstein’s friend Alan Dershowitz, the Harvard law professor, provided the police and the state attorney’s office with a dossier on a couple of the victims gleaned from their MySpace sites—showing alcohol and drug use and lewd comments. The police complained that private investigators were harassing the family of the 14-year-old girl before she was to appear before the grand jury in spring 2006. The police said that one girl had called another to say, “Those who help [Epstein] will be compensated and those who hurt him will be dealt with.”
> [\quote]
> http://nymag.com/news/features/41826/index3.html


----------



## Knotted (Jan 3, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Reminds me of Tony Blair. Maybe Finkelstein isn't used to debating with lawyers. There's no real point debating with lawyers, tbh.



Better comparison - Jeffery Archer.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 3, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Reminds me of Tony Blair. Maybe Finkelstein isn't used to debating with lawyers. There's no real point debating with lawyers, tbh.


 
Talk of the devil...yes Dacre has not missed this chance for a bit of mischief...



> From his 97-page ‘black book’ of phone numbers and email addresses, it is clear Epstein had an impressive array of contacts.
> 
> When its contents were disclosed three years ago, the book was shown to include contact details for former US President Bill Clinton, ex-secretary of state Henry Kissinger, and Barbara Walters, then one of America’s most influential broadcasters.
> 
> ...



 at that last sentence.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jan 3, 2015)

as mentioned somewhere, it looks like the bbc are going with the girl is lying run of the story.

Not surprised, we all know how the BBC covers up for paedophiles


----------



## Wilf (Jan 3, 2015)

ruffneck23 said:


> as mentioned somewhere, it looks like the bbc are going with the girl is lying run of the story.
> 
> Not surprised, we all know how the BBC covers up for paedophiles


As far as I know, the BBC only covers up for paedos if they are:
1. Rich
2. Powerful
3. Employees of the BBC


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jan 3, 2015)

looks like Randy Andy ( Quite unbelievable that was his nickname in the 80's tabloids) definitely falls into groups 1 and 2

I wonder if Max Clifford has anything to do with all this


----------



## killer b (Jan 3, 2015)

Yeah, rich and powerful paedophiles must be protected at all costs from exposure and prosecution, until after they die - then it becomes terrible that their legal team and grip on the establishment were such that they were able to go about their paedo business unchallenged, and lessons must be learned.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jan 3, 2015)

yes lessons will be learnt , unless they are rich or powerful of course


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 3, 2015)

Lastest BBC headline on the subject:



> *Prince Andrew sex claims woman 'should not be believed'*



How much more of a fuck you to victims of sexual abuse can you get? Disgraceful. And of course the bit in inverted commas is the position of another person implicated by these court documents, rather than an informed opinion from any kind of neutral source.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jan 3, 2015)

thats exactly what I thought when I red the bbc site and made that comment above, 

HOW FUCKING DARE HE ?

HOW FUCKING DARE THE BBC ?

This world makes me sick, well not this world, just the ones that run it


----------



## cesare (Jan 3, 2015)

He's a cunt and his ex still owes me £2k


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jan 3, 2015)

I bet David Icke will be having a party tonight...

/derail


----------



## Wilf (Jan 3, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> Lastest BBC headline on the subject:
> 
> How much more of a fuck you to victims of sexual abuse can you get? Disgraceful. And of course the bit in inverted commas is the position of another person implicated by these court documents, rather than an informed opinion from any kind of neutral source.


 They probably also had 'Further Questions Raised About Prince Andrew's Links With Convicted Paedophile' and tossed a coin. Probably.


----------



## teqniq (Jan 3, 2015)

M J Rosenburg who is not exactly one of Dershowitz's biggest fans is loving this:



> MJayRosenberg: Woke up worried Dershowitz rape story was a dream.
> 
> HA!


----------



## elbows (Jan 3, 2015)

Given that versions of the story have emerged before, I guess I will delve some more (beyond the Daily Mail stuff I posted before that mentioned a Spitting Image puppet).

Ghislane Maxwell is the focus of this March 2011 Guardian story. 

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2011/mar/06/ghislaine-maxwell-sandringham-epstein

The final paragraph reminds us what the driving force of the 2011 attention to the story was:



> Ghislaine is in the background of the recently-released picture showing Andrew in 2001 with his arm around the waist of Virginia Roberts, then 17, who claims she worked for Epstein as an erotic masseuse. Ghislaine is reported to have said she has never been contacted by any law enforcement agency in connection with any allegations against Epstein.


----------



## elbows (Jan 3, 2015)

Can anyone discover what happened to the legal action Ghislaine claimed to be taking in 2011?



> LONDON, March 10, 2011 /PRNewswire/ -- Ghislaine Maxwell denies the various allegations about her that have appeared recently in the media. These allegations are all entirely false.
> 
> It is unacceptable that letters sent by Ms Maxwell's legal representatives to certain newspapers pointing out the truth and asking for the allegations to be withdrawn have simply been ignored.
> 
> ...



http://www.prnewswire.co.uk/news-releases/statement-on-behalf-of-ghislaine-maxwell-156665045.html


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 3, 2015)

Possibly her lawyers advised against taking libel action. 



> Ghislaine is reported to have said she has never been contacted by any law enforcement agency in connection with any allegations against Epstein.



What an oddly specific denial, there seem to be a few of those cropping in relation to all this


----------



## FNG (Jan 3, 2015)

Edit phone fuxk up 
brogdale
Odd that they left mandleson off the list of names in Epstein's contact books as he's named numerous times in an article that's still on the mail website


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 3, 2015)

ruffneck23 said:


> I bet David Icke will be having a party tonight...
> 
> /derail


david icke has a party every night.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jan 3, 2015)

yeah i read that ' ALLEDGEDLY'  Mandleson, Bill Clinton ( 21 numbers for that one ) and a number at downing street for a certain mr blair being in the book


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jan 3, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> david icke has a party every night.



i didnt know you hung out with him every night ?


----------



## Zabo (Jan 3, 2015)

Some cracking comments on the Yahoo site including a few odd ones such as evacuating the royals to Canada. A damn site better than the castrated BBC and Guardian. Scroll down.

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/palace-denies-prince-andrew-sex-claims-162050973.html


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 3, 2015)

ruffneck23 said:


> i didnt know you hung out with him every night ?


he's a residency at the lizard house at london zoo


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jan 3, 2015)

RT's website has some pretty mad comments too


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jan 3, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> he's a residency at the lizard house at london zoo



which you frequent by the sounds of it 

anyway , i did do a /derail on the icke bit , lets not go off track from something that's really quite serious eh ?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 3, 2015)

ruffneck23 said:


> which you frequent by the sounds of it


perhaps you could show me where i have declared, intimated or implied such a thing.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jan 3, 2015)

well you seemed to know what he does every night , ANYWAY back on track


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 3, 2015)

Zabo said:


> Some cracking comments on the Yahoo site including a few odd ones such as evacuating the royals to Canada. A damn site better than the castrated BBC and Guardian. Scroll down.
> 
> https://ca.news.yahoo.com/palace-denies-prince-andrew-sex-claims-162050973.html





> I was forced to lick his mother for years


----------



## twentythreedom (Jan 3, 2015)

This is some deeply fucked up shit  That such vile, cruel people could operate like that so (seemingly) successfully, for so long.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jan 3, 2015)

twentythreedom said:


> This is some deeply fucked up shit  That such vile, cruel people could operate like that so (seemingly) successfully, for so long.




money talks,  or to put it more correctly, money silences


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jan 3, 2015)

I wasnt going to drink today but all this is depressing me so much im off down the pub


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 3, 2015)

ruffneck23 said:


> I wasnt going to drink today but all this is depressing me so much im off down the pub


have a pint of top shelf


----------



## goldenecitrone (Jan 3, 2015)

twentythreedom said:


> This is some deeply fucked up shit  That such vile, cruel people could operate like that so (seemingly) successfully, for so long.



Extremely rich and powerful people can get away with most stuff. If Rupert Murdoch was skull-fucking babies most nights, all his flunkies would just look the other way. Such is the power of vast amounts of wealth.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jan 3, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> have a pint of top shelf


lol , i hope youre not wishing me to kill myself by alcohol poisoning


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 3, 2015)

ruffneck23 said:


> lol , i hope youre not wishing me to kill myself by alcohol poisoning


just trying to make sure you have some seasonal cheer.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 3, 2015)

goldenecitrone said:


> Extremely rich and powerful people can get away with most stuff. If Rupert Murdoch was skull-fucking babies most nights, all his flunkies would just look the other way. Such is the power of vast amounts of wealth.


Until they can't...

I think a senior royal could get away with many things in the UK, including rape, but Prince Andrew is far less special in the US. In a way, he's already not got away with it totally.


----------



## twentythreedom (Jan 3, 2015)

goldenecitrone said:


> Extremely rich and powerful people can get away with most stuff. If Rupert Murdoch was skull-fucking babies most nights, all his flunkies would just look the other way. Such is the power of vast amounts of wealth.



Well, exactly


----------



## killer b (Jan 3, 2015)

Outside of a revolutionary or power struggle situation, when was the last time an extremely rich & powerful person didn't get away with it? I'm struggling to think of an occasion.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 3, 2015)

killer b said:


> Outside of a revolutionary or power struggle situation, when was the last time an extremely rich & powerful person didn't get away with it? I'm struggling to think of an occasion.


The father of a protagonist here, Robert Maxwell. Conrad Black served time. Several Russian oligarchs are behind bars.


----------



## Maurice Picarda (Jan 3, 2015)

Allen Stanford.


----------



## Maurice Picarda (Jan 3, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Several Russian oligarchs are behind bars.



The likes of Khordorkovsky and Lebedev are inside for annoying Putin as much as for anything else, of course.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 3, 2015)

Jeremy Thorpe

Profumo.


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 3, 2015)

Jeffrey Archer.


----------



## youngian (Jan 3, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> Lastest BBC headline on the subject:
> 
> 
> 
> How much more of a fuck you to victims of sexual abuse can you get? Disgraceful. And of course the bit in inverted commas is the position of another person implicated by these court documents, rather than an informed opinion from any kind of neutral source.


BBC have always had a blind spot with the Royals, their permanent fawning is repugnant and would even make a Stalinist state blush. And that grovelling little weasel scab Nicholas Witchell is the embodiment of their coverage.


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 3, 2015)

Although Archer did get away with it tbh. Do the time for perjury and we'll forget about the charity misdemeanours.


----------



## killer b (Jan 3, 2015)

Maxwell totally got away with it. The Russian oligarchs are covered by the 'power struggle' bit. You can have Black.


----------



## twentythreedom (Jan 3, 2015)

killer b said:


> Outside of a revolutionary or power struggle situation, when was the last time an extremely rich & powerful person didn't get away with it? I'm struggling to think of an occasion.


This is exactly what's (still) so exasperating. Here it is in front of us - "andy is a paedo nonce shitcunt, him and his mates rape kids, everyone knows it" * and yet fuck all will happen 

<*allegedly>

(Eta: hopefully something _will_ happen this time though, obvs)


----------



## killer b (Jan 3, 2015)

Thorpe was a lib dem, so not really in the ranks of the extremely rich & powerful.


----------



## Maurice Picarda (Jan 3, 2015)

Ken Lay and Bernie Ebbers.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 3, 2015)

killer b said:


> Maxwell totally got away with it. The Russian oligarchs are covered by the 'power struggle' bit. You can have Black.


Killing yourself rather than be exposed isn't getting away with it, imo. It's the opposite of getting away with it - it's killing yourself because you didn't get away with it.

You can have the oligarchs. You're right that it's a power struggle.


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 3, 2015)

Was his body ever found?


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 3, 2015)

Oh it was.


----------



## Maurice Picarda (Jan 3, 2015)

Although the Yanks committed sins against Wall Street; whether if they'd kept their books in order they could have got away with noncery is moot.


----------



## killer b (Jan 3, 2015)

Either way, its a piss poor list, and the penalties any of them have had to pay have been insignificant on the whole.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Jan 3, 2015)

killer b said:


> Maxwell totally got away with it. The Russian oligarchs are covered by the 'power struggle' bit. You can have Black.



And even Black served just over two years for nicking and spending over 80 million dollars of his employee's pension funds. Didn't some poor sod in the UK get the same amount of time for nicking a bottle of water during the London riots?


----------



## killer b (Jan 3, 2015)

goldenecitrone said:


> And even Black served just over two years for nicking and spending over 80 million dollars of his employee's pension funds.


Yeah, that's getting away with it isn't it?


----------



## goldenecitrone (Jan 3, 2015)

killer b said:


> Yeah, that's getting away with it isn't it?



A mere slap on the wrist for that colossal cunt.


----------



## elbows (Jan 3, 2015)

Maurice Picarda said:


> Allen Stanford.



Rarely do I miss the opportunity to post an image of him after he failed to work his charm on his fellow prisoners.


----------



## twentythreedom (Jan 3, 2015)

killer b said:


> Yeah, that's getting away with it isn't it?



He became a "humbler, more sensitive person" 

http://t.thestar.com/#/article/news...d_black_views_on_improving_prison_system.html


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 3, 2015)

Maurice Picarda said:


> Allen Stanford.


Now he is properly fucked. Not that rich or powerful though, I will admit. He played at being more powerful than he was. 

But I do think the likes of Thorpe count. A high-up politician, married in to the aristocracy. You could say that he got away with it in the sense that he didn't go to jail. But in the sense that we all know what he did, no he didn't.


----------



## Maurice Picarda (Jan 3, 2015)

goldenecitrone said:


> Didn't some poor sod in the UK get the same amount of time for nicking a bottle of water during the London riots?



That was six months. And there's a reasonable argument for treating theft during riot as a violent crime, and sentencing accordingly.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 3, 2015)

Maurice Picarda said:


> That was six months. And there's a reasonable argument for treating theft during riot as a violent crime, and sentencing accordingly.


No there is not.


----------



## Maurice Picarda (Jan 3, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> No there is not.



Riots are common enterprises and they are violent. When they are used as cover for acquisitive crime, that crime relies on violence. Seems fair for there to be some multiple on the sentencing.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 3, 2015)

Maurice Picarda said:


> Riots are a common enterprise and they are a violent one. When they are used as cover for acquisitive crime, that crime relies on violence. Seems fair for there to be some multiple on the sentencing.


Are we still talking about the bloke who got thirsty while out and about during a riot?

It was an act of revenge, carried out to show the terrible power of the state over the powerless masses and stop such unseemliness from happening again. The triviality of the offence is kind of the point in that sense - punish someone in a way that they don't deserve just to show that you can.


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 3, 2015)

Maurice Picarda said:


> Riots are common enterprises and they are violent. When they are used as cover for acquisitive crime, that crime relies on violence. Seems fair for there to be some multiple on the sentencing.


You're confusing rioting with looting. They're not the same thing. Looting takes place in the aftermath of rioting and most rioters aren't looters.


----------



## Maurice Picarda (Jan 3, 2015)

nino_savatte said:


> You're confusing rioting with looting. They're not the same thing. Looting takes place in the aftermath of rioting and most rioters aren't looters.



Yes, the argument is properly that looting relies on rioting and that looters are therefore complicit in riot. That's the position the law takes, anyway.  I'm not confusing anything with anything - I'm merely describing the thinking that informs the sentencing guidelines.

It seems like a sensible argument to me, although I'd only have given the bloke twelve weeks suspended and a week's community service.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 3, 2015)

Looting is walking into Dixon's and walking out with a nice tv. Taking a bottle of water because you're thirsty, and I'm guessing there weren't any shops _actually serving _at the time, is not looting.


----------



## Maurice Picarda (Jan 3, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Looting is walking into Dixon's and walking out with a nice tv. Taking a bottle of water because you're thirsty, and I'm guessing there weren't any shops _actually serving _at the time, is not looting.



Of course it's looting. And wherever the chap was, he would have been no more than a couple of miles from honestly-obtainable water. Thirst is not desperation or justification.

Anyway, this is derailing the thread for schadenfreude about Andrew Mountbatten.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 3, 2015)

Maurice Picarda said:


> Of course it's looting. And wherever the chap was, he would have been no more than a couple of miles from honestly-obtainable water. Thirst is not desperation or justification.
> 
> Anyway, this is derailing the thread for schadenfreude about Andrew Mountbatten.


It does show a nice juxtaposition between how you're treated depending on your position, though. Some people get thrown into jail for taking a bottle of water. Others get away with rape.


----------



## Fez909 (Jan 3, 2015)

Maurice Picarda said:


> I'm merely describing the thinking that informs the sentencing guidelines


And that would be fine if the sentencing guidelines actually applied. When the state wants to show its power, then the guidelines are meainingless.

Riots: magistrates advised to 'disregard normal sentencing'


----------



## Maurice Picarda (Jan 3, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It does show a nice juxtaposition between how you're treated *depending on your position*, though. Some people get thrown into jail for taking a bottle of water. Others get away with rape.



It doesn't show anything about that highlighted point. It points to odd sentencing guidelines which are particularly harsh on violent property crime, and to a criminal justice system which is suboptimal at dealing with sexual exploitation. 

But it doesn't say anything at all about whether princes and paupers are treated differently. Intuitively, one would assume that they are, but we'd need to contrast York with a less celebrated abuser to prove the case.


----------



## Maurice Picarda (Jan 3, 2015)

Fez909 said:


> And that would be fine if the sentencing guidelines actually applied. When the state wants to show its power, then the guidelines are meainingless.
> 
> Riots: magistrates advised to 'disregard normal sentencing'



That's still a guideline.


----------



## Zabo (Jan 3, 2015)

Maurice Picarda said:


> Anyway, this is derailing the thread for schadenfreude about Andrew Mountbatten.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 3, 2015)

Maurice Picarda said:


> Riots are common enterprises and they are violent. When they are used as cover for acquisitive crime, that crime relies on violence. Seems fair for there to be some multiple on the sentencing.


one would seem appropriate


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 3, 2015)

Maurice Picarda said:


> That's still a guideline.


i never had you down as a wanker's wanker before but thank you for showing your true colours here.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 3, 2015)

Terrible red-eye and flash caught in window...


----------



## Wilf (Jan 3, 2015)

Maurice Picarda said:


> That's still a guideline.


That really is one of the weakest and more illogical defences to being proved wrong I've seen on urban.


----------



## Maurice Picarda (Jan 3, 2015)

Wilf said:


> That really is one of the weakest and more illogical defences to being proved wrong I've seen on urban.



We could argue for a while about the status of additional guidelines produced by the originators of guidelines. But to call that being "proved wrong" is risible.


----------



## twentythreedom (Jan 3, 2015)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Terrible red-eye and flash caught in window...
> 
> 
> View attachment 65913


Body language of all 3 is a bit


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 3, 2015)

Fez909 said:


> And that would be fine if the sentencing guidelines actually applied. When the state wants to show its power, then the guidelines are meainingless.
> 
> Riots: magistrates advised to 'disregard normal sentencing'



"David Cameron said that anyone involved in the riots should expect to go to prison."

Except, of course, for the people who caused them in the first place.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 3, 2015)

twentythreedom said:


> Body language of all 3 is a bit



The girl looks like she has some inkling that the photo she's posing for could well be used to bury the scumbags on either side of her one day. That's why she's the only one whose smile looks genuine.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 3, 2015)

twentythreedom said:


> Body language of all 3 is a bit


tbh it would look completely innocent to me without any context.


----------



## Fez909 (Jan 3, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> The girl looks like she has some inkling that the photo she's posing for could well be used to bury the scumbags on either side of her one day. That's why she's the only one whose smile looks genuine.


At this point she might just have been impressed to be meeting a prince. She said no sex happened on this visit and she requested the photo to show her mam.


----------



## twentythreedom (Jan 3, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> The girl looks like she has some inkling that the photo she's posing for could well be used to bury the scumbags on either side of her one day. That's why she's the only one whose smile looks genuine.


It was the hands that made me WTF


----------



## killer b (Jan 3, 2015)

twentythreedom said:


> It was the hands that made me WTF


it looks like she's resting her hand on the hip of a man dressed in black, stood right behind her.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 3, 2015)

Maurice Picarda said:


> We could argue for a while about the status of additional guidelines produced by the originators of guidelines. But to call that being "proved wrong" is risible.


Excellent  - 'we could argue about..' is always a good way of indicating the weakness of your position.

(((((originators of guidelines))))


----------



## Maurice Picarda (Jan 3, 2015)

I accept your apology.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 3, 2015)

Maurice Picarda said:


> We could argue for a while about the status of additional guidelines produced by the originators of guidelines. But to call that being "proved wrong" is risible.


It's tantamount to admitting a state of martial law.Guidelines no longer count - just like in martial law, all bets off, all previous rules null and void, any pretence of process suspended.


----------



## twentythreedom (Jan 3, 2015)

killer b said:


> it looks like she's resting her hand on the hip of a man dressed in black, stood right behind her.


Looks like she's about to / just did move Andy's hand somewhere. Andy is cupping his stiffy and Ghislaine is scratching or something 

Or not


----------



## Wilf (Jan 3, 2015)

If you knew nothing about the different people in the photo and just went off the image itself, there certainly looks to be an _intimacy_ of some sort there (probably not a good word given the alleged coercion).  She's pressed in against him though you can't tell if she leaned in or he pulled her in.  However, one thing that is definite is that he chose to place his hand on the naked middle of a woman he didn't know.  Pointless speculation on my part but it certainly doesn't look like a simple 'fan pic', particularly as he is someone with a lifetime's experience in not offering up compromising stances to the camera.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 3, 2015)

She isn't pressed in against him.

Think you're stretching, wilf. He's just put his arm around the waist of someone with a short top on. He's not even copping a feel.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 3, 2015)

The man is an awful cunt. Should be buried at low tide in the sand up to his neck.


----------



## killer b (Jan 3, 2015)

I think groundless speculation based on a fairly innocuous snapshot isn't very helpful...

(the guy in black behind her? It's the guy from Amadeus isn't it?)


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 3, 2015)

killer b i think everyone pretty much would be entirely unsurprised if buckingham palace were eating humble pie by march


----------



## killer b (Jan 3, 2015)

Hope so. But this is bollocks:



Wilf said:


> If you knew nothing about the different people in the photo and just went off the image itself, there certainly looks to be an _intimacy_ of some sort there (probably not a good word given the alleged coercion).  She's pressed in against him though you can't tell if she leaned in or he pulled her in.  However, one thing that is definite is that he chose to place his hand on the naked middle of a woman he didn't know.  Pointless speculation on my part but it certainly doesn't look like a simple 'fan pic', particularly as he is someone with a lifetime's experience in not offering up compromising stances to the camera.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 3, 2015)

killer b said:


> I think groundless speculation based on a fairly innocuous snapshot isn't very helpful...


I agree.  Certainly could be innocuous, the only point I was making was that certain elements in the photo made it _consistent with_ the bigger, alleged, story (and so less likely to be a simple fan pic).  But yes, I agree, doesn't really help the discussion.


----------



## Buckaroo (Jan 3, 2015)

Dershowitz doesn't think, doesn't know if he's ever met her, he's met thousands of people, talked to millions, says he wouldn't be able to pick her out in a line up. That's what he said. A line up!? Snapshot doesn't prove that Randy Andy and his mates sexually exploited anyone but it does confirm they're in the same fucking picture.


----------



## killer b (Jan 3, 2015)

erm yes. I was talking specifically about speculation like what wilf posted.


----------



## Diamond (Jan 3, 2015)

Within the swirl of child abuse stories that have been doing the rounds over the past few years, this is still pretty remarkable, although the interesting thing is that if you look into the history of the case, the links have been there for several years - _i.e. _journalists covering this could have joined the dots a long time beforehands.

An interesting point though is that if you try and look at this from the point of view of a guest and close friend of Epstein's - you certainly know that this guy is wealthy and influential, you probably know he prefers, at the very least, very young women who are at the borderline, at the very best, of the age of consent and you also choose to attend parties thrown by him at his private residences where this stuff was going on.

(And I don't mean to distract from the victims in that manner, but was just trying to work it through from the pov of the fire-fighting team on the other side)


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jan 3, 2015)

i think Jill Dandon (RIP) might have been on to something


----------



## killer b (Jan 3, 2015)

ruffneck23 said:


> i think Jill Dandon (RIP) might have been on to something


I'm not sure if I dare ask what evidence you have to support that particular assertion.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 3, 2015)

killer b said:


> I'm not sure if I dare ask what evidence you have to support that particular assertion.


Do we really want to do this to the thread?


----------



## killer b (Jan 3, 2015)

Well, no. I don't even need to check where that's come from do  I?


----------



## twentythreedom (Jan 3, 2015)

You need evidence?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 3, 2015)

killer b said:


> I'm not sure if I dare ask what evidence you have to support that particular assertion.


jill dando changed her name to dandon to disguise herself and help protect her from the windsor clan who hired arsenal legend charlie george to track her down


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jan 3, 2015)

oh just hearsay , or a bit of this

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...phile-ring-inside-BBC-no-one-wanted-know.html

fail link admittedly


----------



## killer b (Jan 3, 2015)

twentythreedom said:


> You need evidence?


no. no, I really don't.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jan 3, 2015)

killer b said:


> Well, no. I don't even need to check where that's come from do  I?




no


----------



## Zabo (Jan 3, 2015)

Deleted


----------



## Diamond (Jan 3, 2015)

Zabo said:


> http://thecolemanexperience.wordpress.com/2013/03/03/who-killed-jill-dando/
> 
> http://thecolemanexperience.wordpre...t-the-palace-and-the-jimmy-savile-connection/
> 
> https://establishmentwatch.wordpres...o-murder-and-savileestablishment-paedophiles/



That first source prettily readily reverts to SRA stuff, which is a bit dodge to say the least.

http://thecolemanexperience.wordpress.com/2014/11/22/filthy-britains-satanic-secrets-3/


----------



## killer b (Jan 3, 2015)

fuck. sorry guys.


----------



## killer b (Jan 3, 2015)

the third one is a neo-nazi site. lovely.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jan 3, 2015)

none of those were my links


----------



## killer b (Jan 3, 2015)

no, but this is what happens when you introduce conspiracy theory to a thread.


----------



## Dan U (Jan 3, 2015)

Tomorrow's front pages aren't pretty.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 3, 2015)

Dan U said:


> Tomorrow's front pages aren't pretty.


they never are


----------



## Zabo (Jan 3, 2015)

Back to the main. Seems like the Fail are going for it big time. Updated 22:51

What's their 'agenda'?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...nce-Andrew-sex-slave-drama-telling-truth.html


----------



## brogdale (Jan 3, 2015)

Zabo said:


> Back to the main. Seems like the Fail are going for it big time. Updated 22:51
> 
> What's their 'agenda'?



Well...they did drop their german name.


----------



## Buckaroo (Jan 3, 2015)

The Banker and the Prince. Together in the picture.
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...idence-prince-andrew-lobbying-jeffrey-Epstein


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 3, 2015)

The Times is saying that Andrew may have immunity from US prosecution as part of the original deal Epstein struck with prosecutors.

I've no idea how that can possibly hold water in law, but then the US is not a place where logic often prevails.


----------



## Zabo (Jan 3, 2015)

A bit wordy but...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trial_in_absentia#United_States_of_America


----------



## killer b (Jan 3, 2015)

Zabo - it's probably best you at least break the link to the neo-nazi site you posted above. or remove it altogether.


----------



## Zabo (Jan 3, 2015)

Cheers deleted.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 3, 2015)

Thing is, we've got a real-life conspiracy right here. Why try to make another one up?


----------



## Diamond (Jan 3, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> The Times is saying that Andrew may have immunity from US prosecution as part of the original deal Epstein struck with prosecutors.
> 
> I've no idea how that can possibly hold water in law, but then the US is not a place where logic often prevails.



I'm certainly no expert in US law but this specific lawsuit, as far as I understand it, is trying to tease more disclosure from the plea bargain, which is largely confidential.

The point being is that the bargain part is that you, the accused, deny or limit your liability on some charges in exchange for admitting or offering information on others with the rest remaining confidential.

The current claimants/plaintiffs are seeking greater disclosure of the underlying documents that the bargain rests upon on the basis that their fundamental/statutory(?) rights were infringed by the prosecutor's decision to settle.

The overall point being is that the idea that anyone knows whether anyone has any kind of immunity from prosecution by any body, be it Prince Andrew or anyone else, is absurd unless you are a party to the bargain because it is necessarily a confidential contract.

In other words, the Times, unless they have deep insider info, are peddling pure speculation - not that the press has ever done that for sure, of course...


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jan 3, 2015)

i wasn't trying to , just reinforce the one thats happening , oh well


----------



## Buckaroo (Jan 3, 2015)




----------



## Wilf (Jan 3, 2015)

Buckaroo said:


> View attachment 65919


Having a chinwag _after_ Epstein's conviction. A true, true friend.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 3, 2015)

Buckaroo said:


> View attachment 65919



Shit. I've just realised that I've spent the afternoon shuffling around Croydon dressed like an (alleged) royal paedo.


----------



## elbows (Jan 3, 2015)

Zabo said:


> Back to the main. Seems like the Fail are going for it big time. Updated 22:51
> 
> What's their 'agenda'?
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...nce-Andrew-sex-slave-drama-telling-truth.html



When considering agenda etc, keep in mind that the Fail have been interested in this story before, they covered it in 2011 and probably even earlier. Not got link handy, but I posted it earlier in the thread.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 3, 2015)

Buckaroo said:


> View attachment 65919


now imagine the fence 20' taller and both men in orange jumpsuits and you'll have an inkling of the future for andrew mountbatten-windsor.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 3, 2015)

Forget the dilly dallying about. The man is a rapist.


----------



## elbows (Jan 3, 2015)

Spin, spin, spin the wheel of justice, 
See how fast the bastard turns.


----------



## youngian (Jan 3, 2015)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...nce-Andrew-sex-slave-drama-telling-truth.html



> Miss Roberts makes the extraordinary claim that she was paid about $15,000 (just under £10,000) by the 58-year-old Epstein as a reward for sleeping with the Prince and other sexual services for Epstein.’



That's more than Argentinian fighter pilots were paid when they were ordered to blow up Prince Andrew's chopper


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 3, 2015)

youngian said:


> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...nce-Andrew-sex-slave-drama-telling-truth.html
> 
> 
> 
> That's more than Argentinian fighter pilots were paid when they were ordered to blow up Prince Andrew's chopper


pity they didn't get the parasite in '82


----------



## Zabo (Jan 3, 2015)

They keep mentioning lots of photographs? Pure speculation but will any of them ever surface?

"Andrew was photographed surrounded by topless women during one holiday with them in Thailand"

"Miss Roberts eventually would learn that she, too, was being photographed by hidden cameras."


----------



## Buckaroo (Jan 3, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> pity they didn't get the parasite in '82


----------



## Wilf (Jan 3, 2015)

He's mates with the President of Kazakhstan. Perhaps he'll set up shop there after all this unpleasantness given the Kazak approach to press freedom.


----------



## elbows (Jan 3, 2015)

The Mirror uses a 2011 National Enquirer interview to add some salacious detail:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/prince-andrew-underage-sex-slave-4915304


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 3, 2015)

elbows said:


> The Mirror uses a 2011 National Enquirer interview to add some salacious detail:
> 
> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/prince-andrew-underage-sex-slave-4915304


but what do you think?


----------



## Tankus (Jan 3, 2015)

Were those sausages Lincoln ...or just plain pork ?


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 4, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> Note also the redundant phrase 'underage minors'. Anyone would think someone was typing that statement in a terrible hurry.


It's possible for someone to be a minor but over the age of consent in many jurisdictions (eg UK). Isn't the term 'minor' here tantamount to admitting that if minors were involved, they were not underage ones?


----------



## elbows (Jan 4, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> but what do you think?



That I can think more freely than I can type due to our amazing libel system.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 4, 2015)

The woman at the heart of this story had better be ready for some shit being thrown at her. Dershovitz + the royals, quite a formidable team.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 4, 2015)

Dershowitz has a sterling record for finding shit on people.


----------



## Tankus (Jan 4, 2015)

I hope that there are some UK politicos involved so that the US lawyer's can force the issue.....rather than having continuous review's of the reviewed review which then gets parked on a dusty shelf.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 4, 2015)

Wilf said:


> The woman at the heart of this story had better be ready for some shit being thrown at her. Dershovitz + the royals, quite a formidable team.


 Named in tonight's, latest palace denial...they re seriously rattled...



> “*It is emphatically denied that HRH The Duke of York had any form of sexual contact or relationship with Virginia Roberts. The allegations made are false and without any foundation.”*


----------



## Wilf (Jan 4, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Named in tonight's, latest palace denial...they re seriously rattled...


Yes, they had to make 2 denials in 2 hours.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 4, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Named in tonight's, latest palace denial...they re seriously rattled...


I suspect they have been forced into being more specific than they normally are - as you say, naming her rather than just the usual dry 'allegations are without foundation'.  Logically, that draws them a little closer to the next question: 'so, are you denying that he met her on the 3 occasions she mentions' [well, _further 2_ given that he clearly met her on one occasion].  But of course they won't have to get drawn into those questions, they won't get doorstepped, they'll still have a protective layer around them.  That's why we are typing on threads about people like him rather than seeing people like him doing time.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Jan 4, 2015)

> “*It is emphatically denied that HRH The Duke of York had any form of sexual contact or relationship with Virginia Roberts. The allegations made are false and without any foundation.”*



Well, they would say that, wouldn't they?


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 4, 2015)

Some Dershowitz Wikiquotes: 





> In representing criminal defendants—especially guilty ones—it is often necessary to take the offensive against the government: to put the government on trial for its misconduct. In law, as in sports, the best defense is often a good offense.
> 
> The courtroom oath—to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth—is applicable only to witnesses... because the American justice system is built on a foundation of not telling the whole entire truth.
> Alan Dershowitz, The Best Defense (New York: Vintage), 1983-5-12, p. xiv.


Prof. Dershowitz has previous in responding to accusation with attack. Some years ago, he was accused by Norman Finkelstein of plagiarism in his book _The Case for Israel_. The case was widely reported, and it ended with Finkelstein losing tenure at his university, apparently as a result of complaints lodged by Dershowitz. Counterpunch has a long and exhaustive article examining the details, which concludes


> As of this writing, Dershowitz appears to have succeeded in protecting his own career by destroying Finkelstein’s. It is now probably too late to remedy all of the harm that Dershowitz’s conduct has caused, both to the review of Finkelstein’s tenure application and to public perceptions of Finkelstein and his work. But some sort of acknowledgement or apology by Harvard concerning Dershowitz’s wrongdoing might go some distance toward clearing the air and making amends.


http://www.counterpunch.org/2008/02/11/the-case-against-alan-dershowitz/

When Epstein was facing the music back in 2007





> (p 4) Epstein’s friend Alan Dershowitz, the Harvard law professor, provided the police and the state attorney’s office with a dossier on a couple of the victims gleaned from their MySpace sites—showing alcohol and drug use and lewd comments. The police complained that private investigators were harassing the family of the 14-year-old girl before she was to appear before the grand jury in spring 2006. The police said that one girl had called another to say, “Those who help [Epstein] will be compensated and those who hurt him will be dealt with.”


This lengthy New York Magazine article gives an insight into the lifestyle and assumptions of Epstein and his circle.

Lovely people. Especially the notion that by paying your victims you somehow make it all right for them and absolve yourself of any wrong.


----------



## youngian (Jan 4, 2015)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-slave-drama-telling-truth.html#ixzz3Nq8ThJr1



> WORLD EXCLUSIVE: The first full account of the masseuse at the center of the explosive Prince Andrew 'sex slave' drama... but is she telling the truth?



Or is the Mail telling the truth? well sort of, its a rehash of an interview conducted eight years ago.


> Jane Doe 3 is Virginia Roberts, whose story was first uncovered in 2007 by The Mail on Sunday following a painstaking investigation by our reporter Sharon Churcher, who tracked her to Australia.



You would have thought a painstaking investigative reporter would be able to reveal if she was telling the truth after nearly a decade. By painstaking investigation I suspect they mean fee neogtiation over the phone with Max Clifford or someone similar.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jan 4, 2015)

yeah , but what is andy to do now max is behind bars ?


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jan 4, 2015)

although the mirror isnt really a credible  source , todays dirt could be quite damaging

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/prince-andrew-been-secretly-filmed-4915421


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jan 4, 2015)

> ... the case went forward in Palm Beach despite the efforts of the dream team _(of high-priced lawyer scum)_ because of community rage arising from the class issues in the case—Epstein found the girls not from his own fancy neighbourhood but from the struggling suburbs.


 http://nymag.com/news/features/41826/

Need some more rage about stuff like that ...


----------



## youngian (Jan 4, 2015)

ruffneck23 said:


> yeah , but what is andy to do now max is behind bars ?


The Windsors have a far more sophiscated PR and press operation than anything Clifford could provide. That's why they're still around.


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 4, 2015)

Maurice Picarda said:


> Yes, the argument is properly that looting relies on rioting and that looters are therefore complicit in riot. That's the position the law takes, anyway.  I'm not confusing anything with anything - I'm merely describing the thinking that informs the sentencing guidelines.
> 
> It seems like a sensible argument to me, although I'd only have given the bloke twelve weeks suspended and a week's community service.


Looting can occur after natural disasters, invasions etc. Riots can take place without looting happening in their wake. "The law" as someone once said, "is an ass".


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 4, 2015)

bluescreen said:


> Lovely people. Especially the notion that by paying your victims you somehow make it all right for them and absolve yourself of any wrong.



Well it does seem like the US legal system allows, or even encourages, precisely this sort of 'buying yourself out of trouble' behaviour. IIRC the fact you've paid off other victims in the past cannot be used as evidence against you in criminal proceedings, because of course the innocent and those with nothing to hide often pay off accusers to avoid legal action.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 4, 2015)

I don't want to go the full Icke on this, but you'd imagine the British secret service/foreign office will have been involved in assessing what information is out there on andy windsor, and liaising with his lawyers (not just now but since the story broke).


----------



## twentythreedom (Jan 4, 2015)

killer b said:


> no. no, I really don't.


Go on, I dare ya


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 4, 2015)

elbows said:


> That I can think more freely than I can type due to our amazing libel system.


so no view on the n.e. as a valid source. you don't know your arse from your ...


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 4, 2015)

Wilf said:


> Yes, they had to make 2 denials in 2 hours.


sadly didn't deny first denial yet


----------



## killer b (Jan 4, 2015)

one more denial and then we move on to the crucifixion, yep?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 4, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> I'm aware of that. What I'm saying is that he's a proven liar in other arenas. And therefore not someone who adds credibility to Andrew's defence.



Yup, having Dershoshitz come to your defence, even instrumentally, is probably something all lawyers fear for their clients. His mendacity has no bounds.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 4, 2015)

killer b said:


> one more denial and then we move on to the crucifixion, yep?


Well, he's certainly a cock, I'm sure he's crowed about his exploits, too.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 4, 2015)

Timely...



> *Royal Family granted new right of secrecy *
> 
> *The Royal Family is to be granted absolute protection from public scrutiny in a controversial legal reform designed to draw a veil of secrecy over the affairs of the Queen, Prince Charles and Prince William.
> 
> ...



http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...ily-granted-new-right-of-secrecy-2179148.html


----------



## fishfinger (Jan 4, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> Timely...
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...ily-granted-new-right-of-secrecy-2179148.html


That article is 4 years old.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jan 4, 2015)

Yeah but this stuff was first breaking what, late 2000's when his pedo pal got busted?

I think Fat Andy's dodgy relationships with dictators were coming under scrutiny around 2010 or so too.


----------



## free spirit (Jan 4, 2015)

This has got to be tip of the iceberg stuff hasn't it?

The way she talks about it, it seems to have been fairly normalised behaviour for Andrew

I'd suspect that he'll have been making full use of the hareems of the vaious middle east prince's he's been doing deals with, and in his head probably feels entitled to be doing that, what with him also being a prince and all that.

I doubt he'd have realised the age of consent was 18 in florida, or probably thought he was doing anything particularly wrong / that couldn't be made to go away with a wad of cash.

It really does seem like there is / was a significant proportion of the establishment who basically view this sort of thing as being their birthright, with a sort of continuum down from the 18 year old in the hareem in the article linked to being showered with jewels and presents, down to the 12 year old boys* plucked from the childrens homes and pimped out to sex parties for London's elite. All operating on the basis that the law doesn't apply to them, and the establishment will close ranks behind them if needed as too many of them have their own guilty secrets not to.

*Not accusing Prince Andrew of this, just saying how this seems to fit in with the wider pattern that's emerging


----------



## fishfinger (Jan 4, 2015)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Yeah but this stuff was first breaking what, late 2000's when his pedo pal got busted?
> 
> I think Fat Andy's dodgy relationships with dictators were coming under scrutiny around 2010 or so too.


Fair enough, but new rights or old, the royals would get anything that sensitive, hushed up.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 4, 2015)

fishfinger said:


> That article is 4 years old.



LOL  Err sorry!  Timely people are posting a link to it elsewhere then!


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 4, 2015)

Given the old articles contents though I am left wondering how this will play out and what laws will be invoked to keep a lid on the current story/details.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 4, 2015)

fishfinger said:


> Fair enough, but new rights or old, the royals would get anything that sensitive, hushed up.


In Britain they would yes. Far less power over stuff happening in the US.


----------



## fishfinger (Jan 4, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> LOL  Err sorry!  Timely people are posting a link to it elsewhere then!


No problem


----------



## fishfinger (Jan 4, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> In Britain they would yes. Far less power over stuff happening in the US.


Good point.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 4, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> Given the old articles contents though I am left wondering how this will play out and what laws will be invoked to keep a lid on the current story/details.


My guess is that if nothing else emerges he'll pretty much ride the storm out.  It's just inconceivable that he'd be allowed to end up anywhere near a court case.  If more does come out, what, perhaps quietly move abroad to the middle east (or Kazakstan, as mentioned).  I think we can rejoice in his discomfort, but I doubt there'll be many consequences for him.  As you say, anything that looks like it might really threaten him will be made to go away.


----------



## Gone Girl (Jan 4, 2015)

I think he's a creep


----------



## youngian (Jan 4, 2015)

Anyone unfortunate enough to observe the obsequious fawning of people around the rich, powerful and famous will know that a prince can get shagged and their cocked sucked for free even from their male grovellers. At least the 'sex slave' was smart enough to get paid for it. It looks like she's going for double bubble and I'd be surprised if they nail Alan Dershowitz who could spot an ambulance chasing chancer lawyer a mile off.


----------



## Fez909 (Jan 4, 2015)

youngian said:


> Anyone unfortunate enough to observe the obsequious fawning of people around the rich, powerful and famous will know that a prince can get shagged and their cocked sucked for free even from their male grovellers. At least the 'sex slave' was smart enough to get paid for it. It looks like she's going for double bubble and I'd be surprised if they nail Alan Dershowitz who could spot an ambulance chasing chancer lawyer a mile off.


What a disgusting post.

Why do you believe this scum over a woman whom you knew nothing about until very recently? What makes him seem more believable to you, when all the evidence makes it seem likely she's telling the truth?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 4, 2015)

youngian said:


> Anyone unfortunate enough to observe the obsequious fawning of people around the rich, powerful and famous will know that a prince can get shagged and their cocked sucked for free even from their male grovellers. At least the 'sex slave' was smart enough to get paid for it. It looks like she's going for double bubble and I'd be surprised if they nail Alan Dershowitz who could spot an ambulance chasing chancer lawyer a mile off.



Smart enough to get paid? The young woman in question was exercising business acument. 

/vomits

_Gold diggers_ everywhere in your world right?


----------



## Wilf (Jan 4, 2015)

Fez909 said:


> What a disgusting post.
> 
> Why do you believe this scum over a woman whom you knew nothing about until very recently? What makes him seem more believable to you, when all the evidence makes it seem likely she's telling the truth?


It was a disgusting post. To be honest youngian I read your post and thought I'd got it wrong.  Seems not though, you really did come out with that shit.


----------



## Fez909 (Jan 4, 2015)

Wilf said:


> It was a disgusting post. To be honest youngian I read your post and thought I'd got it wrong.  Seems not though, you really did come out with that shit.


I re-read it a few times, too, just to make sure it wasn't sarcasm or I was misreading.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 4, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> Smart enough to get paid?
> 
> /vomits
> 
> _Gold diggers_ everywhere in your world right?


Indeed. I'll admit I've not read anything beyond the general reporting of this story, but I've not seen anything seriously questioning the woman's claim that she was pimped out from the age of 15 by Epstein. Whatever the level of coercion and force - and however much knowledge Windsor had of her age - she certainly appears to have been raped by his clients (and Epstein himself) from the age of 15.  For youngian to assume she is a liar and only after money is just scummy. Should be ashamed of yourself.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 4, 2015)

Fez909 said:


> I re-read it a few times, too, just to make sure it wasn't sarcasm or I was misreading.


Yep, youngian I'll be happy to apologise if you want to clarify what you meant.


----------



## youngian (Jan 4, 2015)

Yes hands up I was being facetious, I know jackshit about the motives of any of individuals in this case. The first sentence isn't wide of the mark though, we're a nation bowers and scrapers.


----------



## free spirit (Jan 4, 2015)

youngian said:


> Anyone unfortunate enough to observe the obsequious fawning of people around the rich, powerful and famous will know that a prince can get shagged and their cocked sucked for free even from their male grovellers. At least the 'sex slave' was smart enough to get paid for it. It looks like she's going for double bubble and I'd be surprised if they nail Alan Dershowitz who could spot an ambulance chasing chancer lawyer a mile off.


That could potentially apply to the 18 year old in the article I linked to up thread, but not to someone who was hired as a live in masseuse at the age of 15.


----------



## youngian (Jan 4, 2015)

Wilf said:


> For youngian to assume she is a liar and only after money is just scummy.


 You're absolutely correct I was making unfounded assumptions based on limited information of a pending court case.


----------



## laptop (Jan 4, 2015)

elbows said:


> When considering agenda etc, keep in mind that the Fail have been interested in this story before, they covered it in 2011 and probably even earlier. Not got link handy, but I posted it earlier in the thread.





> Now, thanks to the court documents Miss Roberts lodged in Florida last week, The _*Mail on Sunday*_ can publish...
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2895735/The-account-masseuse-centre-explosive-Prince-Andrew-sex-slave-drama-telling-truth.html



They've been sitting on these interviews for three years or more. Now the lawyers will let them publish more...

Also, I suspect, a chance to outdo the real enemy of the _MoS_ - the _Daily Fail_.


----------



## Idris2002 (Jan 4, 2015)

Suppose for the sake of argument that he doesn't get away with what he allegedly did. What will the likely broader consequences be? Lasting damage to the monarchy?


----------



## Wilf (Jan 4, 2015)

Idris2002 said:


> Suppose for the sake of argument that he doesn't get away with what he allegedly did. What will the likely broader consequences be? Lasting damage to the monarchy?


Would certainly do some damage if he ended up having to reach a financial settlement (unlikely as that is).  The chance of him seeing the inside of a U.S or U.K prison is so remote I can't play along with that even as a thought experiment!


----------



## laptop (Jan 4, 2015)

Idris2002 said:


> Suppose for the sake of argument that he doesn't get away with what he allegedly did. What will the likely broader consequences be? Lasting damage to the monarchy?



It's not clear to me that any of his alleged actions would have been an offence under UK law. As noted above, extradition is unlikely. 

If that's true, much of the damage has already taken place. This may be the worst for the Saxe-Coburg Gothas:



> *He was the most hideous dancer I had ever seen.* He was grabbing my hips and he was pouring with perspiration and he had this cheesy smile.




On the other hand, if photos emerge...


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jan 4, 2015)

I would imagine there would be shit loads of evidence about to come out or would ALL the papers dare to report this ?

admittedly they all say ' allegedly ' , but would all the papers take the risk ?


----------



## Wilf (Jan 4, 2015)

ruffneck23 said:


> I would imagine there would be shit loads of evidence about to come out or would ALL the papers dare to report this ?
> 
> admittedly they all say ' allegedly ' , but would all the papers take the risk ?


I'm sure his bodyguards/royal protection officers have enough to finish him off, but they'll have signed the official secrets act.


----------



## Fez909 (Jan 4, 2015)

laptop said:


> It's not clear to me that any of his alleged actions would have been an offence under UK law.


Prostitution laws, maybe?



			
				Sexual Offences Act 2003 said:
			
		

> Paying for sexual services of a child
> 
> (1)A person (A) commits an offence if—
> 
> ...


If it happened as she said, then just because _he _never paid her personally, it doesn't mean she wasn't a prostitute and/or that he wasn't soliciting her. He knew she was 17, too, which puts it squarely in illegal territory.

The bit in bold is the wiggle room. Did he know she had been paid for this? Of course he would say no. But it is plainly obvious that she must have been.


----------



## Mation (Jan 4, 2015)

Idris2002 said:


> Suppose for the sake of argument that he doesn't get away with what he allegedly did. What will the likely broader consequences be? Lasting damage to the monarchy?


I don't know what 'damage to the monarchy' means. The only meaningful damage that could be done imo (though likely not by this, I'm very sad to think) is that they lose their position (ie stop being the monarchy) and/or their money. They might profess to care about their reputation, but ultimately, why would they really give a fuck unless it means they can't live their profligate sponging lifestyle?


----------



## laptop (Jan 4, 2015)

Fez909 said:


> Prostitution laws, maybe?
> 
> If it happened as she said, then just because _he _never paid her personally, it doesn't mean she wasn't a prostitute and/or that he wasn't soliciting her. He knew she was 17, too, which puts it squarely in illegal territory.
> 
> The bit in bold is the wiggle room. Did he know she had been paid for this? Of course he would say no. But it is plainly obvious that she must have been.



You're right - I'd forgotten the split age of consent.

That could apply if he knew of photos being taken, too?

Whip-round for a private prosecution?


----------



## Zabo (Jan 4, 2015)

Torygraph

"The Duke of York could face a Scotland Yard investigation into Virginia Roberts’s claims if she makes a formal complaint against him, police sources have confirmed.

Despite the fact that all criminal prosecutions are brought in the name of the Queen, members of the Royal family are not immune from the law. The Princess Royal became the first senior member of the Royal family to receive a criminal record when she was fined £500 in 2002 after admitting having a dog dangerously out of control.

A Metropolitan Police spokesman said of Miss Robert’s claims that she was “sexually abused” by the Duke: “We have not received any allegations at this stage. If we did receive a complaint we would investigate it.”

On Saturday the Duke instructed his lawyers, Harbottle & Lewis, to write to media organisations reminding them of his denials and urging caution in reporting Miss Roberts’s claims"

In full

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...n-over-Virginia-Roberts-sex-abuse-claims.html


----------



## elbows (Jan 4, 2015)

ruffneck23 said:


> I would imagine there would be shit loads of evidence about to come out or would ALL the papers dare to report this ?
> 
> admittedly they all say ' allegedly ' , but would all the papers take the risk ?



They aren't taking much of a risk in most instances. The fact this story has emerged in several goes over a good number of years gives further clues about their non-risk taking methods: Reporting of things other people have said in connection with specific legal actions. There are some exceptions to this, often involving the tabloid version of the more scandalous details, but they are taking the same sort of risks they've done on a calculated basis many times before, and they probably have additional confidence due to Epsteins reputation already being undeniably tarnished by prior conviction.

Its entirely unclear to me whether they think more is about to come out that will allow the story to run and run. The post-Savile attitudes towards abuse can give the story momentum that it lacked in, for example, 2011, and there is always a chance that they hope if any of the alleged offenders were serial offenders, more victims might be prompted to speak out. But there is nothing in particular that gives me any inkling on those fronts with this story.


----------



## Zabo (Jan 4, 2015)

As they say, if it lasts for more than a week it will last a long time. I wonder if the Press will follow him around and ask him for example: 'Have you anything to say about these allegations?'

Thank goodness for the non castrated press outwith these Isles.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 4, 2015)

laptop said:


> It's not clear to me that any of his alleged actions would have been an offence under UK law.
> On the other hand, if photos emerge...



What? Photos of 'actions' you don't regard as criminal?


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jan 4, 2015)

brogdale said:


> What? Photos of 'actions' you don't regard as criminal?



Depends how grotesque his dancing was ...


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 4, 2015)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Depends how grotesque his dancing was ...


put them in front of the jury - len goodman, darcey bussell, craig revell-horwood and bruno tonioli


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 4, 2015)

Zabo said:


> Torygraph
> 
> "The Duke of York could face a Scotland Yard investigation into Virginia Roberts’s claims if she makes a formal complaint against him, police sources have confirmed.
> 
> ...


i can't help thinking yer prince will be instructing his lawyers for something else in the not too distant future.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 4, 2015)

Mation said:


> I don't know what 'damage to the monarchy' means. The only meaningful damage that could be done imo (though likely not by this, I'm very sad to think) is that they lose their position (ie stop being the monarchy) and/or their money. They might profess to care about their reputation, but ultimately, why would they really give a fuck unless it means they can't live their profligate sponging lifestyle?


because they want to be met by an adoring publick, not a baying mob.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 4, 2015)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Depends how grotesque his dancing was ...


Could have been of Astaire-like quality tbh, but for such a powerful adult to leer at, grab and sweatily dance over a young girl just 3 years older than his own daughter, sounds pretty grotesque to me.


----------



## laptop (Jan 4, 2015)

brogdale said:


> What? Photos of 'actions' you don't regard as criminal?



Can happen. 

It's illegal to make an indecent photo of someone under 18 (unless you're married to them).

*Even if* nothing happening in front of the lens was illegal.

And "make" is interpreted very widely - including copying a computer file. So it could include knowingly appearing in such a photo. (I don't have the stomach right now to go through the 2003 Act to check for specific offences involved in appearing in indecent photos with a person under 18.)


----------



## brogdale (Jan 4, 2015)

Zabo said:


> Torygraph
> 
> "The Duke of York could face a Scotland Yard investigation into Virginia Roberts’s claims if she makes a formal complaint against him, police sources have confirmed.
> 
> ...



Let's hope Ms Roberts does go ahead and make a formal complaint to the UK authorities. From what the Guardian has said about the details of Epstein's plea-deal it would appear that Windsor would already enjoy immunity in the US even if, at some future point, he were to be cited as a co-conspiritator...



> The Guardian understands the plea deal states: “If Epstein successfully fulfils all the terms of this agreement, the United States also agrees that it will not institute any criminal charges against any potential co-conspirators of Epstein including but not limited to [four named individuals not including Prince Andrew or Dershowitz].”
> 
> It could mean that if Prince Andrew is ever considered a “co-conspirator” with Epstein, he could be prevented from facing criminal charges.



As well as seeking some justice for his alleged victims, it would be good to see the on-going reputational damage for a member of the Mountbatten-Windsor family that a 'Yewtree'-style enquiry would effect.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 4, 2015)

laptop said:


> Can happen.
> 
> It's illegal to make an indecent photo of someone under 18 (unless you're married to them).
> 
> ...


Oh, I see what you mean. 
Even if not in UK?


----------



## laptop (Jan 4, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Even if not in UK?



Don't know for sure about that. But the allegations include events in the UK...


----------



## Espresso (Jan 4, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Could have been of Astaire-like quality tbh, but for such a powerful adult to leer at, grab and sweatily dance over a young girl just 3 years older than his own daughter, sounds pretty grotesque to me.



Anyone who's ever been to an office Christmas party any time in the last...well forever, really, will more than likely have seen that, to be right. 
It is grotesque; of course it is. But it's hardly something that's unique to parties where your host is a millionaire pimp.


----------



## hot air baboon (Jan 4, 2015)

youngian said:


> The Windsors have a far more sophiscated PR and press operation than anything Clifford could provide. That's why they're still around.



...I see this evenings BBC2 tv schedule has been subject to some hasty cosmetic surgery....the 9pm slot now playing host to Racing Legends : Graham Hill was formerly occupied by :

*Reinventing the Royals* : Steve Hewlett tells the inside story of the relationship between the monarchy & the media during the past 20 years...

...oops...Mr Hewlett may have to add a hasty new chapter to that one...


----------



## brogdale (Jan 4, 2015)

Espresso said:


> Anyone who's ever been to an office Christmas party any time in the last...well forever, really, will more than likely have seen that, to be right.
> It is grotesque; of course it is. But it's hardly something that's unique to parties where your host is a millionaire pimp.



Don't know what sort of office parties you've experienced, but were the recipients of that sort of attention really 17? And had they been groomed, abused, flown across the Atlantic and pimped out by a convicted paedophile? I'd say that Ms Roberts' reported account does sound pretty uniquely grotesque tbh, and to see any equivalence between Windsor's behaviour and that of an office party seems a little odd, to say the least.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jan 4, 2015)

This quote, in relation to a bunch of angry spewage from Dershowitz attacking her credibility is interesting.


> In a statement released through her lawyers to the Guardian, the woman hit back, saying: “These types of aggressive attacks on me are exactly the reason why sexual abuse victims typically remain silent and the reason why I did for a long time. That trend should change. I’m not going to be bullied back into silence.”


 http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jan/04/prince-andrew-buckingham-palace-jeffrey-epstein

As we know from other cases, such as that prof who called Dershowitz on plagiarism and dishonesty and lost his tenure as a result, Dershowitz has form for using his influence to try to wreck the lives of lesser mortals who inconvenience him.

So if she's really prepared to have a go at exposing Epstein's sleazy friends like Fat Andy and Dershowitz for (allegedly) accepting his pedo-pimp largesse, _despite_ knowing what the likes of Dershowitz will stoop to ... well good for her.

I think the quote also does something interesting in terms of drawing battle-lines beyond the case of one billionaire pedo-pimp, a bunch of privileged (alleged) punters and his victims and placing them somewhere with much broader relevance.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 4, 2015)

laptop said:


> You're right - I'd forgotten the split age of consent.
> 
> That could apply if he knew of photos being taken, too?
> 
> Whip-round for a private prosecution?


There's certainly enough under English law to do him for what happened in London.  From memory, that was when she was 17, at which point it is illegal to have sex with a prostitute in the UK.  Even if she was 18, which I think she was in one of the 3 encounters, having sex with someone under the control of a pimp is still illegal.

Edit: ah, no, the latter only came in in 2008.


----------



## Espresso (Jan 4, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Don't know what sort of office parties you've experienced, but were the recipients of that sort of attention really 17? And had they been groomed, abused, flown across the Atlantic and pimped out by a convicted paedophile? I'd say that Ms Roberts' reported account does sound pretty uniquely grotesque tbh, and to see any equivalence between Windsor's behaviour and that of an office party seems a little odd, to say the least.



I know and you know that a fair number of young women put up with being groped at Christmas parties by much older men. And in the workplace itself, come to that. And some of them are certainly as young as 17. No question. I know I was. 
I was just bit surprised at how you phrased your post, I expect. 

You are quite right, I do not have any experience of international jetsetting paedophile pimps, their victims or their punters.


----------



## laptop (Jan 4, 2015)

Bernie Gunther said:


> As we know from other cases, such as that prof who called Dershowitz on plagiarism and dishonesty and lost his tenure as a result, Dershowitz has form for using his influence to try to wreck the lives of lesser mortals who inconvenience him.



'You mean Norman Finkelstein? Not all readers of this thread may know that Dershowitz-Finkelstein, one of the great feuds of our time, started as a result of Finkelstein's rebuttal of Dershowitz's _Zionist_ claims...


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jan 4, 2015)

laptop said:


> 'You mean Norman Finkelstein? Not all readers of this thread may know that Dershowitz-Finkelstein, one of the great feuds of our time, started as a result of Finkelstein's rebuttal of Dershowitz's _Zionist_ claims...


 Yep, I meant Finkelstein. If I remember right though, the specific issue was that he reckoned some zionist propaganda tract Dershowitz had written was not only a pack of lies, but a _plagiarised_ pack of lies.


----------



## xenon (Jan 4, 2015)

Why do the "truck bomb diplomats" of this world never target these cunts.

Note to MI5. Fuck you.


----------



## teqniq (Jan 4, 2015)

xenon said:


> Why do the "truck bomb diplomats" of this world never target these cunts...



I imagine that they are fairly low if not absent from their list of suitable targets and also because that would require a great deal more planning than they are inclined to engage in.


----------



## xenon (Jan 4, 2015)

teqniq said:


> I imagine that they are fairly low if not absent from their list of suitable targets and also because that would require a great deal more planning than they are inclined to engage in.



Quite probably. I've been following this thread but have nothing useful to add to any debate. Good luck to the victims. Money is not infinitely metaphorically bulletproof.


----------



## quiquaquo (Jan 4, 2015)

Time to send the royals into permanent exile. Never make Italy's mistake and let the cunts back in to the country.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 4, 2015)




----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 4, 2015)

TopCat said:


>







prince andrew could play a central role in a challenging new production of 'the execution of louis xvi'


----------



## TopCat (Jan 4, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


>


Rid us of this filth...


----------



## quiquaquo (Jan 4, 2015)

TopCat said:


>



Why give them the chance to be martyrs? Throw them out of the country for all time.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 4, 2015)

quiquaquo said:


> Time to send the royals into permanent exile.


on a one-way trip, like laika only less mourned


----------



## TopCat (Jan 4, 2015)

Read yer history...


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 4, 2015)




----------



## quiquaquo (Jan 4, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> on a one-way trip, like laika only less mourned



The Iranian monkey came back alive and healthy, let's not make that mistake with this lot:


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 4, 2015)

quiquaquo said:


> The Iranian monkey came back alive and healthy, let's not make that mistake with this lot:


yeh. but the iranians weren't aiming for either alpha centauri or the sun.


----------



## quiquaquo (Jan 4, 2015)

Idiotic but amusing, their depravity is without limit: 




http://chrisspivey.org/prince-philip-is-this-the-sickest-man-in-the-uk/


----------



## quiquaquo (Jan 4, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh. but the iranians weren't aiming for either alpha centauri or the sun.


----------



## hot air baboon (Jan 4, 2015)

quiquaquo said:


> Idiotic but amusing, _*their*_ depravity is without limit:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



.....you mean _*our*_ depravity...when we're given any power over our fellow man....absolutely nothing unusual about the Royals....


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 5, 2015)

youngian said:


> The Windsors have a far more sophiscated PR and press operation than anything Clifford could provide. That's why they're still around.


Yes, it's called the BBC. Frex, this misleading paragraph: 





> US citizen Virginia Roberts waived her anonymity in an interview with the Mail on Sunday in 2011, claiming she had been sexually exploited by Epstein as a teenager.
> 
> She also claimed to have met Prince Andrew on several occasions, *but the paper said there was no suggestion of any sexual contact between Virginia Roberts and the prince*. (my bold)


 which maybe doesn't look so bad in the extract but in the context of their discussion of the recent Fail article, in which the 2011 story is nested, seems to be downplaying Roberts' claims.


hot air baboon said:


> .....you mean _*our*_ depravity...when we're given any power over our fellow man....absolutely nothing unusual about the Royals....


 Not unusual but I dispute 'our'. Milgram didn't find 100% compliance; Zimbardo stopped the experiment because of the excesses of some of the guards, not all. It _is_ possible to behave decently outside of anarchy. But maybe not so easy if you're a pampered prince.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 5, 2015)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Yep, I meant Finkelstein. If I remember right though, the specific issue was that he reckoned some zionist propaganda tract Dershowitz had written was not only a pack of lies, but a _plagiarised_ pack of lies.


Yup, there's a link here to a thorough article in Counterpunch I posted upthread. He is a piece of work.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 5, 2015)

Anyone else here uncomfortable about the "sex slave" tag? There is a world of difference between watching Friends on the sofa with the Madam and being locked in the cellar. I'm not seeking to denigrate the extent of emotional manipulation of young people. They are helped to build their own gilded cage.  But I have seen too many BTL comments saying: 'so she was paid, and nothing was stopping her from walking away...' There needs to be a lot more explanation about immaturity, emotional pressure, societal expectation, the money drug... It isn't as simple as walking away, is it? In a way, it's as old-fashioned as inadvertently taking the King's shilling. There must be a sense in which the victim, having been paid, then feels complicit and unable to escape the bargain.


----------



## laptop (Jan 5, 2015)

bluescreen said:


> Anyone else here uncomfortable about the "sex slave" tag?



Yes, though I did have the impression it was her lawyers'...



bluescreen said:


> ...I have seen too many BTL comments saying: 'so she was paid, and nothing was stopping her from walking away...'



What's the betting that these commenters are users of prostitutes, seeking self-justification?


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 5, 2015)

The other thing is that if ever hyperbole was set up to backfire, it's here. A bad part of me wonders if it's deliberate sabotage. Most people don't seem to be able to get their heads round the idea that you can be theoretically free but not mentally or actually free, or that billionaires have ample means to construct your idea of freedom.


----------



## FNG (Jan 5, 2015)

Thats something i came across reading the comments pages in the Cosby case. Cosby was targeting young clients of Talent Agencies for Grooming, Epstein aspiring models.

Both cunts.


----------



## FNG (Jan 5, 2015)

bluescreen said:


> The other thing is that if ever hyperbole was set up to backfire, it's here. A bad part of me wonders if it's deliberate sabotage. Most people don't seem to be able to get their heads round the idea that you can be theoretically free but not mentally or actually free, or that billionaires have ample means to construct your idea of freedom.



 bear in mind the hyperbole is there simply to sell papers with scant regard to the influence or outcome on ongoing or future trials,theres a few sun front pages Hillsbrough, Cheats Kiss ect that bear that out.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 5, 2015)

FNG said:


> bear in mind the hyperbole is there simply to sell papers with scant regard to the influence or outcome on ongoing or future trials,theres a few sun front pages Hillsbrough, Cheats Kiss ect that bear that out.


DM is playing a blinder on this. Stuff that other people aren't carrying yet. I still hate them, not least for making me want to look at their filth. And as for Peter McKay, he makes Katie whassname look progressive.


----------



## newbie (Jan 5, 2015)

sort of.  The DM is good at getting news that fits its agenda but ignores so much that conflicts with its agenda .  I want journalists to start following the money- during the time this was going on the Grand Old Duke of York was the UKs _Special Representative for International Trade and Investment_. Being a prince opens doors, and he's been linked to arms deals and corruption worldwide, which is exactly what he was expected to do.  Fine, if sick, that's what the poxy royals are for.  But what was in all this for Epstein? Why was he spending 10 grand to supply his 'friend' with a well groomed young woman? 

Offering access to a harem is one of the oldest and most obvious ways to buy influence.  As a prince the godoy must have been trained from birth to be suspicious of anyone bearing such gifts, to question their motivation, to avoid the possibility of being manipulated or blackmailed, to act as a statesman.  I want journalists to uncover what access and influence the godoy gave Epstein in return, and I'm not looking to the DM to provide that.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 5, 2015)

As for The Sun, only something that might bring down the House of Windsor...


newbie said:


> sort of.  The DM is good at getting news that fits its agenda but ignores so much that conflicts with its agenda .  I want journalists to start following the money- during the time this was going on the Grand Old Duke of York was the UKs _Special Representative for International Trade and Investment_. Being a prince opens doors, and he's been linked to arms deals and corruption worldwide, which is exactly what he was expected to do.  Fine, if sick, that's what the poxy royals are for.  But what was in all this for Epstein? Why was he spending 10 grand to supply his 'friend' with a well groomed young woman?
> 
> Offering access to a harem is one of the oldest and most obvious ways to buy influence.  As a prince the godoy must have been trained from birth to be suspicious of anyone bearing such gifts, to question their motivation, to avoid the possibility of being manipulated or blackmailed, to act as a statesman.  I want journalists to uncover what access and influence the godoy gave Epstein in return, and I'm not looking to the DM to provide that.


Don't hold your breath.


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 5, 2015)

If the allegations are being denied, aren't we on dodgy ground discussing this on the basis that they're true?


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 5, 2015)

newbie said:


> As a prince the godoy must have been trained from birth to be suspicious of anyone bearing such gifts, to question their motivation, to avoid the possibility of being manipulated or blackmailed, to act as a statesman.  I want journalists to uncover what access and influence the godoy gave Epstein in return, and I'm not looking to the DM to provide that.


Despite the risk of sounding like a high court judge, can I ask - what's a "Godoy"?


----------



## newbie (Jan 5, 2015)

Grand Old Duke of York


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 5, 2015)

newbie said:


> Grand Old Duke of York


Cheers. Of course! I was reading it as a word, due to the small case letters. (Intriguingly my phone gave it a capital G, so presumably it's also a place, surname or product well enough known in America to be in the software).


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 5, 2015)

Waiting for Godot on Godoy.


----------



## teqniq (Jan 5, 2015)

Trouble is he does turn up. like a bad penny.


----------



## newbie (Jan 5, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> Cheers. Of course! I was reading it as a word, due to the small case letters. (Intriguingly my phone gave it a capital G, so presumably it's also a place, surname or product well enough known in America to be in the software).


I don't like using the respectful term _Prince Andrew_ at all but my failing to know anything about when to use capitals is just pure laziness


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 5, 2015)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Yep, I meant Finkelstein. If I remember right though, the specific issue was that he reckoned some zionist propaganda tract Dershowitz had written was not only a pack of lies, but a _plagiarised_ pack of lies.


He plagiarised Joan Peters' book iirc.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 5, 2015)

newbie said:


> Grand Old Duke of York


he had 10,000 men


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 5, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> Despite the risk of sounding like a high court judge, can I ask - what's a "Godoy"?








manuel godoy recently


----------



## brogdale (Jan 5, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> he had 10,000 men


And when they were up they were up


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 5, 2015)

brogdale said:


> And when they were up they were up


and when they were down they were down


----------



## brogdale (Jan 5, 2015)

Tune: "A-Hunting We Will Go"


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 5, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Tune: "A-Hunting We Will Go"







the duke of york recently


----------



## brogdale (Jan 5, 2015)

Jesus, the sick-fucker introduced his victim to his mother...


> The ‘sex slave’ who was allegedly abused by the Duke of York *was introduced to the Queen* during a visit to London, it has been claimed.
> 
> As Prince Andrew flew home from a skiing holiday in Switzerland to prepare to face fresh allegations, Virginia Roberts’s father, Sky, made further claims about his daughter's connection to the Royal family.
> 
> ...



Even by their recent standard, that's a spectacularly weak denial.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 5, 2015)

newbie said:


> I don't like using the respectful term _Prince Andrew_ at all


Fair enough. Although, I don't think of it as a respected term, meaning, as it does, "hereditary sponger and parasite". Or "descendant of Robber Barons,  who owes his standing to his ancestors' malfeasance". 

It escapes from my lips like a curse, like the plosive attack of "cunt" or "cock". It rings with disdain, distaste and disapproval, like stepped in shit or a vomit-encrusted pillow in the morning. It ranks with "villain", "granny mugger", "mobster"; with "rapist", "drug pusher", with "wife beater". It is vile, debased, and debauched. It is the rank of a pilliedachus, a prancing, preening, vacuous fool. It is the rank of betrayal, cowardice and greed.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 5, 2015)

Said quickly _*Nonce Andrew *_sounds about right.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 5, 2015)

Godoy is a Plantagenet prince.


danny la rouge said:


> Fair enough. Although, I don't think of it as a respected term, meaning, as it does, "hereditary sponger and parasite". Or "descendant of Robber Barons,  who owes his standing to his ancestors' malfeasance".
> 
> It escapes from my lips like a curse, like the plosive attack of "cunt" or "cock". It rings with disdain, distaste and disapproval, like stepped in shit or a vomit-encrusted pillow in the morning. It ranks with "villain", "granny mugger", "mobster"; with "rapist", "drug pusher", with "wife beater". It is vile, debased, and debauched. It is the rank of a pilliedachus, a prancing, preening, vacuous fool. It is the rank of betrayal, cowardice and greed.


Tell us what you really think, Danny.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 5, 2015)

prince andrew is the modern-day gilles de rais


----------



## newbie (Jan 5, 2015)

Dear Mr rouge,
your application for the position of royal correspondent at the BBC is noted.


----------



## teqniq (Jan 5, 2015)

Duke of York strenuously denies he had ten thousand men


----------



## hot air baboon (Jan 5, 2015)

newbie said:


> I don't like using the respectful term _Prince Andrew_ at all





brogdale said:


> Said quickly _*Nonce Andrew *_sounds about right.



...*Ponce* Andrew seems a fair compromise but one supposes Eptein is the ponce in this particular scenario....


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 5, 2015)

We have no record of this happening. We have no record of having burned the records. We have no record of having burned the record of the time we burned all the records.


----------



## Sprocket. (Jan 5, 2015)

This sun of York capers nimbly in a lady's chamber!


----------



## goldenecitrone (Jan 5, 2015)

Andrew of York (sex) slave battle in vain.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 5, 2015)

goldenecitrone said:


> Andrew of York (sex) slave battle in vain.


i would have thought that ever since the lancastrians won the wars of the roses being duke of york was an equivocal position.


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 5, 2015)

If she met the Queen unofficially, as in a friend of her son, why on earth would there be a record of it? Do they keep records on when the Queen goes for a turd too?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 5, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> If the allegations are being denied, aren't we on dodgy ground discussing this on the basis that they're true?



The fact of their denial has little impact on the credibility of the allegations. Particularly considering some of the known liars and scumbags who are doing the denying. We can't really go around saying 'Andrew is a nonce' but we can say that there are questions here that should be answered with something a little bit more solid than 'I never done it', even if they're just questions about what a taxpayer-bankrolled individual was doing associating with a character like Epstein in the first place.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 5, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> If she met the Queen unofficially, as in a friend of her son, why on earth would there be a record of it? Do they keep records on when the Queen goes for a turd too?


yes. in fact, since the 1970s the queen's been shitting more than the average since records began in 1326.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 5, 2015)

Although there was that week in late summer 1997 when she didn't shit at all.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 5, 2015)

I think it's fair to say, as our American cousins might, that the Royal Family does shit anyway.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 5, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> Although there was that week in late summer 1997 when she didn't shit at all.


on the chart of royal shit there's a spike in late august, early september 1997.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 5, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> Although there was that week in late summer 1997 when she didn't shit at all.


eggbound


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 5, 2015)

free spirit said:


> This has got to be tip of the iceberg stuff hasn't it?
> 
> The way she talks about it, it seems to have been fairly normalised behaviour for Andrew
> 
> I'd suspect that he'll have been making full use of the hareems of the vaious middle east prince's he's been doing deals with, and in his head probably feels entitled to be doing that, what with him also being a prince and all that.



That's not the way harems are *supposed* to work. They're supposed to be for the exclusive use of a single potentate, not a stable of available women to be used by the potentate's friends.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 5, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Jesus, the sick-fucker introduced his victim to his mother...
> 
> 
> Even by their recent standard, that's a spectacularly weak denial.


 Technically, "t*here is nothing to suggest that this claim is true. We have no record of such a meeting"* isn't even a denial at all.

Equally, her father saying he remembers her saying 'she met the queen' is itself a bit _indirect_. Have to see if Virginia Roberts repeats it. Certainly ramps things up in terms of the public discussion of the matter, even if it has no obvious bearing on the abuse issue.  If it is true it also makes it more difficult for the palace PR lot to simply stick with 'he did not have sex with that woman' line, though they'll be desperate to do just that.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 5, 2015)

Whether or not he had sex with her is beside the point. Whether he sexually assaulted a minor is a different matter.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 5, 2015)

Actually, can we start saying "they had sex together" rather than suggesting it's something the man does to the woman? That might help the idea it's supposed to be mutual and consensual.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 5, 2015)

bluescreen said:


> Whether or not he had sex with her is beside the point. Whether he sexually assaulted a minor is a different matter.


 Yeah, I know (and you are quite right to point that out).  I was just trying to parody the kind of language (and thus attempt to frame the issue) that the palace PR are using.  But yes, exactly, this is about (alleged) sexual assault.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 5, 2015)

youngian said:


> Anyone unfortunate enough to observe the obsequious fawning of people around the rich, powerful and famous will know that a prince can get shagged and their cocked sucked for free even from their male grovellers.



If he's anything like his great-grandfather and great-uncles, he'd prefer to visit a brothel.



> At least the 'sex slave' was smart enough to get paid for it.



What an utterly dickwipe thing to say. Utterly misses the possible dynamics of the situation, i.e. 1 relatively-powerless young female in a world of powerful people.



> It looks like she's going for double bubble...



"Double bubble"? So seeking fair recompense for violation is "going for double bubble" now, is it?  wanker. 



> ...and I'd be surprised if they nail Alan Dershowitz who could spot an ambulance chasing chancer lawyer a mile off.



Yeah, 'cos Dershowitz hasn't been nailed before, he's actually a superhuman lawyering machine, rather than a pompous, self-regarding liar and plagiarist whose former students know all his tricks.  
Read up on him some time, and not on his wikipedia page, which he constantly edits to remove truths he doesn't like known. Just because he may be able to spot an ambulance chaser (takes one to know one), doesn't mean he can take them on and win if they've got a case.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 5, 2015)

Idris2002 said:


> Suppose for the sake of argument that he doesn't get away with what he allegedly did. What will the likely broader consequences be? Lasting damage to the monarchy?



I'm not sure about "lasting". After all, 120 years ago it was pretty much public knowledge about Prince Eddy sticking his cock in anything vaguely orifice-like, and that most of his male relatives were similarly _laissez faire_ about their fornicatory arrangements. If any evidence emerges to implicate Andrew Windsor, then I've no doubt that the monarchy's excellent public relations operation will go into overdrive in presenting him as a victim of unscrupulous businessmen - an innocent abroad, if you will.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 5, 2015)

laptop said:


> 'You mean Norman Finkelstein? Not all readers of this thread may know that Dershowitz-Finkelstein, one of the great feuds of our time, started as a result of Finkelstein's rebuttal of Dershowitz's _Zionist_ claims...



Surely "started as a result of Dershowitz's *plagiarised* Zionist claims"?


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 5, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> Although there was that week in late summer 1997 when she didn't shit at all.



Maybe the colonic irrigation gets logged in different records.


----------



## youngian (Jan 5, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> If he's anything like his great-grandfather and great-uncles, he'd prefer to visit a brothel.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yes you're 100% right, the whole post was a load of assumptions and prejudices based on unproven allegations for a trial that hasn't taken place. You are of course correct to point out that is a fatuous thing to do. But it appears Prince Andrew is a member of the establishment lizard men paedophile ring so is not entitled to the presumption of innocence. And from reading the online legal experts on this thread I am supposed to conclude that he is guilty beyond reasonable doubt and shake my pitchfork. As its a US trial pending we're all entitled to our opinion, in this country we quite rightly are not as its contempt of court.

Anyone can defend the right to the presumption of innocence if its a boy scout or school girl, the question is are you prepared to defend that principle when it is someone as odious as Prince Andrew. By the looks of this thread evidently not. That's why I wrote such a daft post, to see who would move from Kelvin McKenzie to Helena Kennedy in one easy move.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 5, 2015)

newbie said:


> sort of.  The DM is good at getting news that fits its agenda but ignores so much that conflicts with its agenda .  I want journalists to start following the money- during the time this was going on the Grand Old Duke of York was the UKs _Special Representative for International Trade and Investment_. Being a prince opens doors, and he's been linked to arms deals and corruption worldwide, which is exactly what he was expected to do.  Fine, if sick, that's what the poxy royals are for.  But what was in all this for Epstein? Why was he spending 10 grand to supply his 'friend' with a well groomed young woman?
> 
> Offering access to a harem is one of the oldest and most obvious ways to buy influence.  As a prince the godoy must have been trained from birth to be suspicious of anyone bearing such gifts, to question their motivation, to avoid the possibility of being manipulated or blackmailed, to act as a statesman.  I want journalists to uncover what access and influence the godoy gave Epstein in return, and I'm not looking to the DM to provide that.



With regard to Andrew Windsor's supposed "special rep" role, _Private Eye_ have been following his (mis-)adventures for about a decade, within the bounds of what they can find out via FOI and contacts in various govt depts, so there's obviously evidence out there to be had.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 5, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Maybe the colonic irrigation gets logged in different records.


no, the mass and description of the royal shit is recorded by the lord privy chamber, a position currently held by lord ashton of great yarmouth, who also has the honour of wiping the royal backside.


----------



## laptop (Jan 5, 2015)

bluescreen said:


> Actually, can we start saying "they had sex together" rather than suggesting it's something the man does to the woman? That might help the idea it's supposed to be mutual and consensual.



That would depend on, er, the facts.


----------



## kenny g (Jan 5, 2015)

http://www.politico.com/blogs/under...els-sex-claims-at-alan-dershowitz-200495.html states Alan D is a co-defendant to a claim.



> “One such powerful individual that Epstein forced then-minor Jane Doe #3 to have sexual relations with was former Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz, a close friend of Epstein’s and well-known criminal defense attorney. Epstein required Jane Doe #3 to have sexual relations with Dershowitz on numerous occasions while she was a minor, not only in Florida but also on private planes, in New York, New Mexico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands,” the legal pleading added.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 5, 2015)

kenny g said:


> http://www.politico.com/blogs/under...els-sex-claims-at-alan-dershowitz-200495.html states Alan D is a co-defendant to a claim.


hurrah

i hope finkelstein's called by the prosecution to give evidence of dershowitz's mendacious ways

perhaps the entire text of 'beyond chutzpah' will be read into the record


----------



## goldenecitrone (Jan 5, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> Although there was that week in late summer 1997 when she didn't shit at all.



God, yeah. Her anus horribilis. Who could forget that?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 5, 2015)

goldenecitrone said:


> God, yeah. Her anus horribilis. Who could forget that?


her annus anus was of course 1992


----------



## Wilf (Jan 5, 2015)

This:
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...-denies-underage-sex-claims-buckingham-palace
and all the other stories give an indication of the chat that's going on between several papers and the various palace courtiers.  However it also looks like a one way deal.  They don't seem able to ask even the most basic and obvious questions - 'so _did_ he go to a club with her in London?  _Did_ he meet her in the Virgin Islands?'.  For once the 'palace spokespersons' seem very chatty, but the journos don't seem willing to do anything to risk the access they are getting.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 5, 2015)

youngian said:


> Yes you're 100% right, the whole post was a load of assumptions and prejudices based on unproven allegations for a trial that hasn't taken place. You are of course correct to point out that is a fatuous thing to do. Prince Andrew however is a member of the establishment lizard men paedophile ring is of course not entitled to the presumption of innocence and from the online legal experts on this thread is without doubt guilty.



Of course he's entitled to the presumption of innocence.
*In criminal justice proceedings*, which are the only place that the legal presumption of innocence actually applies.  In effect what you're saying is "don't speculate, because it's unfair to the bloke who has access to near-unlimited funds for his defence, and an excellent public relations operation".


----------



## youngian (Jan 5, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> Of course he's entitled to the presumption of innocence.
> *In criminal justice proceedings*, which are the only place that the legal presumption of innocence actually applies.  In effect what you're saying is "don't speculate, because it's unfair to the bloke who has access to near-unlimited funds for his defence, and an excellent public relations operation".


Well spotted its speculating and therefore worthless tittle-tattle. A bit like excellent public relations operations which are also worthless when trials are concerned.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 5, 2015)

youngian said:


> Yes you're 100% right, the whole post was a load of assumptions and prejudices based on unproven allegations for a trial that hasn't taken place. You are of course correct to point out that is a fatuous thing to do. But it appears Prince Andrew is a member of the establishment lizard men paedophile ring so is not entitled to the presumption of innocence. And from reading the online legal experts on this thread I am supposed to conclude that he is guilty beyond reasonable doubt and shake my pitchfork. As its a US trial pending we're all entitled to our opinion, in this country we quite rightly are not as its contempt of court.
> 
> Anyone can defend the right to the presumption of innocence if its a boy scout or school girl, the question is are you prepared to defend that principle when it is someone as odious as Prince Andrew. By the looks of this thread evidently not.


 I'm not sure you've got the right to claim the moral highground after some of the assumptions you made about the alleged victim and her motives.  You are though right on one thing, as Citizen66 said, we should at the very least be observing the 'alleged' convention and limiting our speculation (something I've been guilty of certainly).

There's a difference though. The various lefty/anarcho/anti-royalist posters have been making assumptions about windsor on the basis of his past behaviour, links with epstein and the general doings of wealth and power. Yes, we perhaps shouldn't be translating that into an assumption about guilt in this _particular_ case. However you have no reason _whatsover_ to start maligning the alleged victim.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 5, 2015)

Wilf said:


> I'm not sure you've got the right to claim the moral highground after some of the assumptions you made about the alleged victim and her motives.  You are though right on one thing, as Citizen66 said, we should at the very least be observing the 'alleged' convention and limiting our speculation (something I've been guilty of certainly).
> 
> There's a difference though. The various lefty/anarcho/anti-royalist posters have been making assumptions about windsor on the basis of his past behaviour, links with epstein and the general doings of wealth and power. Yes, we perhaps shouldn't be translating that into an assumption about guilt in this _particular_ case. However you have no reason _whatsover_ to start maligning the alleged victim.


by god he does


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 5, 2015)

Wilf said:


> I'm not sure you've got the right to claim the moral highground after some of the assumptions you made about the alleged victim and her motives.  You are though right on one thing, as Citizen66 said, we should at the very least be observing the 'alleged' convention and limiting our speculation (something I've been guilty of certainly).
> 
> There's a difference though. The various lefty/anarcho/anti-royalist posters have been making assumptions about windsor on the basis of his past behaviour, links with epstein and the general doings of wealth and power. Yes, we perhaps shouldn't be translating that into an assumption about guilt in this _particular_ case. However you have no reason _whatsover_ to start maligning the alleged victim.


his several posts indicate a greater affinity with the accused than the accuser


----------



## Diamond (Jan 5, 2015)

kenny g said:


> http://www.politico.com/blogs/under...els-sex-claims-at-alan-dershowitz-200495.html states Alan D is a co-defendant to a claim.


 
The only defendants to the claim are the federal prosecutors.

They are being sued over the terms of the plea bargain.

It's a fine point but it's worth appreciating that Prince Andrew, Dershowitz, Maxwell etc... _none_ of them are being sued and _none_ of them are parties to this particular dispute.

(edited to correct to federal rather than state)


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 5, 2015)

youngian said:


> A bit like excellent public relations operations which are also worthless when trials are concerned.



Unless you get one of those juries with members of the public on it.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 5, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> Unless you get one of thise juries with members of the public on it.


 Not sure why, but that brought to mind the Jeffrey Archer libel trial:


> In his summing-up, the judge, Mr Justice Caulfield, told the jury: "Remember Mary Archer in the witness box. Your vision of her probably will never disappear. Has she elegance? Has she fragrance?
> "Has she had a happy married life? Has she been able to enjoy, rather than endure, her husband Jeffrey? Is he in need of cold, unloving, rubber-insulated sex?"


----------



## youngian (Jan 5, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> Unless you get one of thise juries with members of the public on it.


In a US context that's true but a lawyer for a defendent organising sympathetic PR press interviews and releases while a trial is pending or taking place will find themselves in hot water. See also coppers whispering in journalists' ears to stitch up defendants as with Christopher Jeffries.



Wilf said:


> The various lefty/anarcho/anti-royalist posters have been making assumptions about windsor on the basis of his past behaviour, links with epstein and the general doings of wealth and power.


 Is challenging wealth and power on the basis of decadent behaviour and debauched cabals really a left wing analysis?


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 5, 2015)

has she fragrance? creepy judge is creepy


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 5, 2015)

youngian said:


> Yes hands up I was being facetious, I know jackshit about the motives of any of individuals in this case. The first sentence isn't wide of the mark though, we're a nation bowers and scrapers.



So was this a bollocks post too?

Clearly it was.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 5, 2015)

youngian said:


> Yes you're 100% right, the whole post was a load of assumptions and prejudices based on unproven allegations for a trial that hasn't taken place. You are of course correct to point out that is a fatuous thing to do. But it appears Prince Andrew is a member of the establishment lizard men paedophile ring so is not entitled to the presumption of innocence. And from reading the online legal experts on this thread I am supposed to conclude that he is guilty beyond reasonable doubt and shake my pitchfork. As its a US trial pending we're all entitled to our opinion, in this country we quite rightly are not as its contempt of court.
> 
> Anyone can defend the right to the presumption of innocence if its a boy scout or school girl, the question is are you prepared to defend that principle when it is someone as odious as Prince Andrew. By the looks of this thread evidently not. That's why I wrote such a daft post, to see who would move from Kelvin McKenzie to Helena Kennedy in one easy move.



Self-justification much?
And a pretty pathetic post-realisation of what a twat you are edit, too.


----------



## youngian (Jan 5, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> So was this a bollocks post too?
> 
> Clearly it was.


Caught me out there, I do in fact know everything about the motives of all of the individuals in this case


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 5, 2015)

youngian said:


> Caught me out there, I do in fact know everything about the motives of all of the individuals in this case


No, but you are being a twat for trolling this thread.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 5, 2015)

youngian said:


> Well spotted its speculating and therefore worthless tittle-tattle. *A bit like excellent public relations operations which are also worthless when trials are concerned*.



Of course they are. it's absolutely *impossible* to influence a nation of prospective jury members by playing, for example, the "Andrew is a bit of a thicko who is easily taken-advantage-of" card? The one that's been played on his behalf to excuse indiscretions for most of his adult life?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 5, 2015)

Wilf said:


> I'm not sure you've got the right to claim the moral highground after some of the assumptions you made about the alleged victim and her motives.  You are though right on one thing, as Citizen66 said, we should at the very least be observing the 'alleged' convention and limiting our speculation (something I've been guilty of certainly).
> 
> There's a difference though. The various lefty/anarcho/anti-royalist posters have been making assumptions about windsor on the basis of his past behaviour, links with epstein and the general doings of wealth and power. Yes, we perhaps shouldn't be translating that into an assumption about guilt in this _particular_ case. However you have no reason _whatsover_ to start maligning the alleged victim.



With regard to "past behaviour", many of the national dailies have a safe containing stories that they've been "requested" (outside of the usual Notice system) to not publish. Even when I worked at the _Express_ 30 years ago, there were plenty of them, and these weren't stories where the paper's lawyers had blue-penciled them because they couldn't be stood up by "credible" witnesses. This was stuff "The Establishment" didn't want out in the wild. Even on topics where there was plenty of public speculation (the sexual preferences of Andrew Windsor's younger brother, for example), most papers either didn't run stories that had legs, or ran redacted versions attributed to "disgruntled ex-employees" etc.
The editors and (most of all) the proprietors know what serves them best, and what serves them best is serving "The Establishment", and only rocking the boat gently.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 5, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> Unless you get one of thise juries with members of the public on it.



Now now. youngian shows a fine and nuanced understanding of how public relations works. Edward Bernays would be proud of him.


----------



## youngian (Jan 5, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> Of course they are. it's absolutely *impossible* to influence a nation of prospective jury members by playing, for example, the "Andrew is a bit of a thicko who is easily taken-advantage-of" card? The one that's been played on his behalf to excuse indiscretions for most of his adult life?


I wouldn't underestimate the ability of a court and a jury to start from year zero but your point's well made though and the reality is worse than that, the ability to just make trials go away so they never happen in the first place. And you can do that if you're a celebrity let alone royals. I was a court reporter many years ago and developed a respect for the process and the quality of some of the barristers and judges. At the same time the respect for the reliability of police evidence and eye witness statements plummeted.



ViolentPanda said:


> Edward Bernays would be proud of him.


Damn sauce


----------



## brogdale (Jan 5, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> The editors and (most of all) the proprietors know what serves them best, and what serves them best is serving "The Establishment", and only rocking the boat gently.



Yep, but Dacre's apparent willingness to 'push the envelope' on this story is interesting.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 5, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Yep, but Dacre's apparent willingness to 'push the envelope' on this story is interesting.



I think he's somewhat playing his last hurrah, before mandatory retirement, and doesn't much care of a peerage doesn't come his way. I'm sure he and his predecessor both sat on plenty of stories about royals, and he sees this as a way to go out with a bang *and* promote his own ideas on press regulation, i.e. "we wouldn't have been able to publish this with a state-regulated media".


----------



## laptop (Jan 5, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> I think he's somewhat playing his last hurrah, before mandatory retirement, and doesn't much care of a peerage doesn't come his way. I'm sure he and his predecessor both sat on plenty of stories about royals, and he sees this as a way to go out with a bang *and* promote his own ideas on press regulation, i.e. "we wouldn't have been able to publish this with a state-regulated media".



See also _Private Eye_ (_passim ad nauseam_) on the hate-filled rivalry between the _Mail_ and _Mail on Sunday. 
_
I note that today's _Mail_ (edited by Dacre) isn't _very_ big on Da Prince_. _Yesterday's paper (edited by Geordie Greig) was.

Today's paper has, however, gone big online on photos of a 14-year-old who's gone into modelling


----------



## Zabo (Jan 5, 2015)

A little dig from the Torygraph. More here.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...-controversies-in-pictures.html?frame=3154204


----------



## tony heath (Jan 5, 2015)

This evening the Palace and the BBC are taking a similar line, the BBC report that the Palace is sending a message of business as usual, presumably from Meryll Walters their newish crisis management expert. At the same time the BBC is saying this has happened before and it's pretty much business as usual for the Palace. You know, the normal business.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 5, 2015)

> The Duchess, 55, has remained in Verbier in the Swiss Alps, where she gave her ex-husband her unequivocal support as she headed off for a mountain walk today.
> 
> Asked if she was sticking by her ex-husband, she told reporters: *“The York family is a tight unit. We’ve always been a tight unit.
> 
> ...


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 5, 2015)

brogdale said:


>


a tight unit: with him in london and her in switzerland. and they've always been a tight unit which is undoubtedly why they're divorced.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 5, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> a tight unit: with him in london and her in switzerland. and they've always been a tight unit which is undoubtedly why they're divorced.


Indeed. That's some claim she makes.. 





> *He is a great man, the best in the world."*


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 5, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Indeed. That's some claim she makes..


i've been in the presence of greatness - some people i remember out of the anti-poll tax movement, the anti-facist movement, the republican movement are great people. prince andrew? scum.


----------



## tony heath (Jan 5, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Indeed. That's some claim she makes..


 The York's are certainly tight


----------



## brogdale (Jan 5, 2015)

So fucking tacky...



> The Duchess was herself caught up in the fall-out from the Duke’s friendship with the convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein when it emerged in 2011 that Epstein had paid of a £15,000 debt for her the previous year.
> 
> She described accepting the payment to her former personal assistant Johnny O’Sullivan as “a gigantic error of judgement” and said that “whenever I can I will repay the money and will have nothing ever to do with Jeffrey Epstein ever again”.
> 
> *Asked whether she had since repaid the money, her spokesman declined to answer.*


----------



## brogdale (Jan 5, 2015)

> Speaking from the family ski holiday at a £22,000-a-week chalet in Verbier in the Swiss Alps, The Duchess, 55, has.....



That we fucking pay for, now she can't ponce off her ex's paedo pal.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 5, 2015)

In the circumstances, that's quite a disturbing picture...




Prince Andrew left the resort yesterday, bound for Britain and talks with the Queen, senior aides and lawyers


----------



## TopCat (Jan 5, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> i've been in the presence of greatness - some people i remember out of the anti-poll tax movement, the anti-facist movement, the republican movement are great people. prince andrew? scum.


Nail on head.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 5, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> I think he's somewhat playing his last hurrah, before mandatory retirement, and doesn't much care of a peerage doesn't come his way. I'm sure he and his predecessor both sat on plenty of stories about royals, and he sees this as a way to go out with a bang *and* promote his own ideas on press regulation, i.e. "we wouldn't have been able to publish this with a state-regulated media".


I think Dacre is wedded to certain values and these do not include covering up for establishment figures who want to rape children.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 5, 2015)

Meanwhile....



> Dershowitz has received a formal request from Roberts’ lawyers to be subject on 19 January to a deposition. The letter asks Dershowitz to bring passport pages reflecting his travel over the last decade and “all photographs taken while you were a traveling companion or house guest of Jeffrey Epstein’s”.
> 
> Her lawyers said they would “welcome the same cooperation from Prince Andrew should he choose to avail himself of the same opportunity”.
> 
> Dershowitz, who spoke to Epstein over the weekend, said the multi-millionaire was incensed by the the Florida court motion. “*He is furious that they’re picking on me and the Prince,*” he said. “He says there’s no truth to any of it. So he’s very angry and he thinks this is a tactic to try to get at him.”



What an utter piece of shit.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 5, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Meanwhile....
> 
> 
> 
> What an utter piece of shit.


I read that last paragraph in the original and couldn't work out who the "he" refers to in the reported speech. 

Is it a real quote?


----------



## brogdale (Jan 5, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> I read that last paragraph in the original and couldn't work out who the "he" refers to in the reported speech.
> 
> Is it a real quote?


I'm assuming the _he_ is Epstein.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 5, 2015)

brogdale said:


> I'm assuming the _he_ is Epstein.


Yes, so Dershowitz is saying Epstein is furious because Dershowitz and Andrew are being used to get to Epstein. Epstein is furthermore saying the allegations are untrue. And that's why Epstein is furious. That's what I read it as. 

So, we're being asked to accept the (second hand) word of a convicted sex offender that Andrew and Dershowitz are innocent? Nice character witness! And the motivation for bringing Andrew and Dershowitz into it? That's the best way to get at a convicted sex offender.


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 5, 2015)

Or one with a colossal ego.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 5, 2015)

"I was chatting with a convicted sex offender, and he's upset about this". 

Who gives a fuck? Is there any reason anyone should give a fuck about how irritated a convicted sex offender is about a lawsuit relating to alleged sex offences?


----------



## brogdale (Jan 5, 2015)

This overly convoluted para from the Guardian report appears to be saying that, of course, the palace machine would not seek to check whether any of its output had any basis in truth....


> A source familiar with royal operations said aides were unlikely to have felt the need to carry out further due diligence on Prince Andrew’s denial before issuing it. MI6 and British diplomats routinely provide information to the Royal Household about issues arising abroad and it is understood they are likely to have volunteered any information they had about the veracity of Roberts’ claims before the issuing by the palace of a robust denial.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 5, 2015)

brogdale said:


> This overly convoluted para from the Guardian report appears to be saying that, of course, the palace machine would not seek to check whether any of its output had any basis in truth....


I think the key word there is supposed to be "further".

In other words, the Palace already had all the facts at their fingertips and had no need to do any additional verification. So we can all rest assured that They are Playing Cricket.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 5, 2015)

Guardian now playing the game of using a convicted nonce's word as reason to disbelieve Virginia Roberts:
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jan/05/prince-andrew-sex-claims-rehashed-says-epstein-lawyer

They could so easily framed the story in terms of the palace 'source's' refusal to give any detail as to whether he had met her on 3 occasions.

edit - all in contrast to the mail who are giving it the whole '10 questions for the prince thing' (along with, inevitably, a bit of simpering over sarah ferguson)


----------



## TopCat (Jan 6, 2015)

Sex case sex case hang him hang him hang him.


----------



## gosub (Jan 6, 2015)

TopCat said:


> Sex case sex case hang him hang him hang him.



Don't be so heartless, the man has had to cut short his skiing holiday.


----------



## tony heath (Jan 6, 2015)

Some would like to see him as smooth as snow for this.


----------



## Diamond (Jan 6, 2015)

A few thoughts and my rough "feel" on the case:


Epstein is clearly an offender and has a proven history of such offences.
He cut a deal with the prosecutors on the criminal charges and then has been settling the civil cases ever since, for roughly $150,000 a go as far as I understand.
This case doesn't actually involve Epstein, or Dershowitz or Prince Andrew directly at all; rather it goes to the federal prosecutors.
That is a pretty odd development - either it means that Virginia Roberts has decided, at a pretty late stage, to try and disturb the plea bargain so as to reinstate a criminal prosecution, although that would seem impossible under the principle of double jeopardy which is a very important point, or else this is a tactical move in a wider battle, which seems far more likely to me.
In conclusion, what this looks like to me, overall, is a very smart and fairly sharp move by Roberts' lawyers to exert leverage in some other negotiation, which is not public.

Caveat - I may be completely wrong about all of that but my sense is that this whole affair is a bit of a charade - not without truth per se, but being used for a specific purpose that is not being publically acknowledged.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 6, 2015)

Diamond said:


> That is a pretty odd development - either it means that Virginia Roberts has decided, at a pretty late stage, to try and disturb the plea bargain so as to reinstate a criminal prosecution, although that would seem impossible under the principle of double jeopardy which is a very important point, or else this is a tactical move in a wider battle, which seems far more likely to me.



The action against the federal prosecutors seems to be intended to show that the original plea bargain offered to Epstein was unlawful, and if this is shown to be the case then it's possible Epstein could be charged again.

Also, Epstein never actually went to trial. Double jeopardy applies to cases where a defendant is tried and found not guilty, I'm not sure how it pertains to someone pleading guilty to a lesser charge to avoid a trial.

Of course that this could all be a leverage tactic for a civil lawsuit or something, but in that case dragging the Windsors in to it all would seem like a pretty risky nuclear option.


----------



## Diamond (Jan 6, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> The action against the federal prosecutors seems to be intended to show that the original plea bargain offered to Epstein was unlawful, and if this is shown to be the case then it's possible Epstein could be charged again.
> 
> Also, Epstein never actually went to trial. Double jeopardy applies to cases where a defendant is tried and found not guilty, I'm not sure how it pertains to someone pleading guilty to a lesser charge to avoid a trial.
> 
> Of course that this could all be a leverage tactic for a civil lawsuit or something, but in that case dragging the Windsors in to it all would seem like a pretty risky nuclear option.


 
I'm not sure that that is the case.  Double jeopardy is a pretty broad principle.  If it doesn't apply to plea bargains, then that would undermine the whole settlement process, which in turn would undermine the rule of law in general.

Or to put it another way - I would be surprised if any court was prepared to hear another criminal prosecution against Epstein on the same charges, especially given that he has been convicted and has served time in prison.  That would seem incredible to me.

I agree with your point about the nuclear option though - this may well be the public manifestation of Roberts' team pressing the red button in some other affair.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 6, 2015)

So Dershowitz is planning to sue Roberts for defamation to the tune of $100 million. He's claiming that court privilege doesn't apply to Roberts' claims because, well because he doesn't like them


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 6, 2015)

Diamond said:


> I'm not sure that that is the case.  Double jeopardy is a pretty broad principle.  If it doesn't apply to plea bargains, then that would undermine the whole settlement process, which in turn would undermine the rule of law in general.
> 
> Or to put it another way - I would be surprised if any court was prepared to hear another criminal prosecution against Epstein on the same charges, especially given that he has been convicted and has served time in prison.  That would seem incredible to me.
> 
> I agree with your point about the nuclear option though - this may well be the public manifestation of Roberts' team pressing the red button in some other affair.



But can there be a retrial if the original proceedings are subsequently invalidated?

I'm sure they can subtract the forty-five minutes he's already served in prison from whatever new sentence may be passed.


----------



## Diamond (Jan 6, 2015)

Also - to correct you there, double jeopardy doesn't rest on the way the decision goes.

It's not important what plea you have entered, nor what decision is handed down - the point is more procedural than that, i.e. if you have defended a specific claim, or if the state has prosecuted you for that claim, and a decision has been handed down, you cannot then be tried again for the same claim.

The manifest idea is to prevent people from being relentlessly tried and tried again and again on the same charges.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 6, 2015)

Presumably the people who have been bought off will all have signed something to state that they won't testify against Epstein?


----------



## Diamond (Jan 6, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> Presumably the people who have been bought off will all have signed something to state that they won't testify against Epstein?


 
Almost certainly - the settlement agreements will most likely bind them very tightly.


----------



## yardbird (Jan 6, 2015)

17 pages and I'll make my comment.
It is extremely unlikely that Andrew didn't have sex with the girl.
Isn't it?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 6, 2015)

yardbird said:


> 17 pages and I'll make my comment.
> It is extremely unlikely that Andrew didn't have sex with the girl.
> Isn't it?



Not our place to say I'm sure. 

I'd say it seems extremely unlikely that Roberts would make such claims if there were no factual basis to them.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 6, 2015)

Also I personally wouldn't trust a word Andrew said. The kindest thing that could be said about him is that he's a complete waste of space.


----------



## hot air baboon (Jan 6, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> I'd say it seems extremely unlikely that Roberts would make such claims if there were no factual basis to them.



...whilst I agree it's actually very difficult for Andy Panderer to disprove if he didn't .... ( given there were occassions when they were in the same place on the same day )


----------



## brogdale (Jan 6, 2015)

hot air baboon said:


> ...whilst I agree it's actually very difficult for Andy Panderer to disprove if he didn't .... ( given there were occassions when they were in the same place on the same day )



But _if _Roberts' team were to pursue such a claim against Windsor, the burden of proof would, of course, be on them to prove that it did happen.


----------



## hot air baboon (Jan 6, 2015)

...true...which presumably means he was doing it in front of other witnesses, she's still got her unwashed underwear or they've got piccies...!?


----------



## laptop (Jan 6, 2015)

Diamond said:


> what this looks like to me, overall, is a very smart and fairly sharp move by Roberts' lawyers to exert leverage in some other negotiation, which is not public.



That was my starting assumption.

It strikes me now that IF the plan was to maximise an out-of-court settlement, it's not necessarily working, because everyone is now digging their heels in.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 6, 2015)

hot air baboon said:


> ...whilst I agree it's actually very difficult for Andy Panderer to disprove if he didn't .... ( given there were occassions when they were in the same place on the same day )


 I've not seen anything denying Roberts was part of the nonce's 'entourage'. Equally, if she hadn't been present on the days and in the places windsor was, we'd have heard about it by now.  In fact one of reports in the guardian had 'sources' refusing to be drawn on that issue.  Given that this was a decade ago and was discussed in 2011, both the palace and Dershovitz have had ample time to get their alibis in place.


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 6, 2015)

Wilf said:


> the nonce


 
Vile Andrew?


----------



## Wilf (Jan 6, 2015)

phildwyer said:


> Vile Andrew?


 No, I meant that she was part of epstein's 'entourage'. To be honest, given that he is a convicted sex offender, I'm not sure why I'm using mealy mouthed terms like that.  He was her _pimp_.


----------



## Diamond (Jan 6, 2015)

laptop said:


> That was my starting assumption.
> 
> It strikes me now that IF the plan was to maximise an out-of-court settlement, it's not necessarily working, because everyone is now digging their heels in.


 
This is all pure speculation but I can see a number of different scenarios in which these developments make sense.

The first thing that has to be understood, the predicate starting point, is that this dispute is not new.

We are coming at this very late in the day, after years of criminal and civil proceedings.  However, because of the scandal promised in recent developments, the whole affair gives the impression of being fresh and new when it is in fact rather stale.

So, against that backdrop, I can see the following scenarios making sense - (i) some ambitious and entrepreneurial lawyers looking to make a name for themselves and not being 100% honest with their client (after all the only victory I can see here is to give the federal prosecutor a bloody nose on a point of procedure...), (ii) to exert leverage in some other, secret negotiations (which is the nuclear option and seems like a very risky strategy), or, and this is my preferred conclusion, (iii) to try and bring a party to the negotiating table (again very risky, but if there are no negotiations then there is no prospect of any kind of positive outcome).

But, I agree, in any event, it looks likely that this will be a tactical failure.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 6, 2015)

Diamond said:


> This is all pure speculation but I can see a number of different scenarios in which these developments make sense.
> 
> The first thing that has to be understood, the predicate starting point, is that this dispute is not new.
> 
> ...


_If _you're correct, that 'failure' has been a massive win for those of us keen to see the RF portrayed as the depraved parasites that they are. But I hope, for the sake of the victim(s) that you're wrong.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 6, 2015)

To be honest, I think we all realise that not one single person will see the inside of a prison cell over this, just as not one single establishment figure will do time in the UK.  It shines a light on their priveliged and abusive lives, but that's about it.  Fuck 'em all, the whole shower of dirty bastards.


----------



## Diamond (Jan 6, 2015)

brogdale said:


> _If _you're correct, that 'failure' has been a massive win for those of us keen to see the RF portrayed as the depraved parasites that they are. But I hope, for the sake of the victim(s) that you're wrong.


 
Just to clarify - none of that speculation goes to whether Prince Andrew had sex with an underage girl at one of Epstein's properties.

The initial thing that does start to make you wonder though is the use of the phrase "sex slave".  In any of the circumstances proposed, that is rather over-egging things.


----------



## hot air baboon (Jan 6, 2015)

Wilf said:


> I've not seen anything denying Roberts was part of the nonce's 'entourage'. Equally, if she hadn't been present on the days and in the places windsor was, we'd have heard about it by now.  In fact one of reports in the guardian had 'sources' refusing to be drawn on that issue.  Given that this was a decade ago and was discussed in 2011, both the palace and Dershovitz have had ample time to get their alibis in place.



...the widely published pic of the 2 ( with Grisly Ghislaine a metaphorically and pictorially sinister presence in the background ) proves they were... er...in a hands-on situation on at least one occasion......in that sense whilst the burden of proof maybe on the accuser its still difficult to positively clear your name...( although given the points on his licence & judging by this board he's largely wasting his time on that one...)

...as regards the timing of this issue would it be ridiculous to speculate if the whole post-Savile / Westminster paedo issue may have caused ripples across the Atlantic sufficient to have any bearing at all ...?


----------



## Wilf (Jan 6, 2015)

hot air baboon said:


> ...the widely published pic of the 2 ( with Grisly Ghislaine a metaphorically and pictorially sinister presence in the background ) proves they were... er...in a hands-on situation on at least one occasion......in that sense whilst the burden of proof maybe on the accuser its still difficult to positively clear your name...( although given the points on his licence & judging by this board he's largely wasting his time on that one...)
> 
> ...as regards the timing of this issue would it be ridiculous to speculate if the whole post-Savile / Westminster paedo issue may have caused ripples across the Atlantic sufficient to have any bearing at all ...?


 I agree that it's difficult to prove a negative, but if the palace are claiming windsor had no contact at all with the girl, other than the day of the photo, they should be  able to do that. Things like, 'couldn't have met her in the Virgin Islands, he was elsewhere on that date. Couldn't have met her in the club in London, he's never visited the place'.  They are clearly unwilling to get into that level of detail. That might be because they traditionally don't do detail and anyway won't want to start feeding the press as that will only lead to demands for more detail. In other words they might just be playing the normal palace PR role. The other - and more likely scenario - is that he _did_ meet her in the places and on the dates claimed, but for the moment they don't want to admit that.  Most of all, they'll be hoping epstein having paid off other potential witnesses + Dershovitz's threats does the trick.  Probably will to be honest.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 6, 2015)

Wilf said:


> I agree that it's difficult to prove a negative, but if the palace are claiming windsor had no contact at all with the girl, other than the day of the photo, they should be  able to do that. Things like, 'couldn't have met her in the Virgin Islands, he was elsewhere on that date. Couldn't have met her in the club in London, he's never visited the place'.  They are clearly unwilling to get into that level of detail. That might be because they traditionally don't do detail and anyway won't want to start feeding the press as that will only lead to demands for more detail. In other words they might just be playing the normal palace PR role. The other - and more likely scenario - is that he _did_ meet her in the places and on the dates claimed, but for the moment they don't want to admit that.  Most of all, they'll be hoping epstein having paid off other potential witnesses + Dershovitz's threats does the trick.  Probably will to be honest.


this is the sort of thing which should be in the publick domain, being as so many people are interested in the royal family. it ought to be possible to build up a fairly full chronology of andrew's life from the times, telegraph, hello etc.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 6, 2015)

Wilf 
hello magazine has 3682 results for prince andrew, so a fairly detailed picture of his life can be developed and we can start to get to the bottom of this nasty little suspicion we all have.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 6, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> Wilf
> hello magazine has 3682 results for prince andrew, so a fairly detailed picture of his life can be developed and we can start to get to the bottom of this nasty little suspicion we all have.


 And rather helpfully, our rulers provide this handy search tool:
http://www.royal.gov.uk/LatestNewsandDiary/CourtCircular/Todaysevents.aspx


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 6, 2015)

Wilf said:


> And rather helpfully, our rulers provide this handy search tool:
> http://www.royal.gov.uk/LatestNewsandDiary/CourtCircular/Todaysevents.aspx


ok, there's something in region of 210 listings there for prince andrew in 2008. so there's around 146 days he has to account for. now, some of these will be filled in by publications like hello, and on some days he can't have been up to anything with this woman because of things like xmas. but it's clear he can't readily account for every day.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 6, 2015)

Strangely enough, the Grand Old Duke doesn't seem to have undertaken any engagements since the 15th of December. I do hope he's got his sick note in.


----------



## Dogsauce (Jan 6, 2015)

Wilf said:


> Strangely enough, the Grand Old Duke doesn't seem to have undertaken any engagements since the 15th of December. I do hope he's got his sick note in.



He's probably on a zero hours contract nowadays. Times are hard!


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 6, 2015)

Wilf said:


> Strangely enough, the Grand Old Duke doesn't seem to have undertaken any engagements since the 15th of December. I do hope he's got his sick note in.


spending more time with his lawyers


----------



## Wilf (Jan 6, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> spending more time with his lawyers


 Christmas at Klosters, January cloistered with his brief.


----------



## Mation (Jan 6, 2015)

Diamond said:


> I'm not sure that that is the case.  Double jeopardy is a pretty broad principle.  If it doesn't apply to plea bargains, then that would undermine the whole settlement process, which in turn would undermine the rule of law in general.
> 
> Or to put it another way - I would be surprised if any court was prepared to hear another criminal prosecution against Epstein on the same charges, especially given that he has been convicted and has served time in prison.  That would seem incredible to me.
> 
> I agree with your point about the nuclear option though - this may well be the public manifestation of Roberts' team pressing the red button in some other affair.


As I understand, there has not been any criminal prosecution case heard on the charges that would have had a mandatory 10 year jail term if he was found guilty. Surely, if the deal made to drop those charges is illegal then he can be tried on them for the first time. The charge he pleaded guilty to and served time for wouldn't come into it.


----------



## Diamond (Jan 6, 2015)

Mation said:


> As I understand, there has not been any criminal prosecution case heard on the charges that would have had a mandatory 10 year jail term if he was found guilty. Surely, if the deal made to drop those charges is illegal then he can be tried on them for the first time. The charge he pleaded guilty to and served time for wouldn't come into it.



Didn't he accept some kind of conviction on the charges?  If so, there would have been no need to go to trial, as far as I understand it.

But yes, if the plea bargain was illegal, I agree that does muddy the waters somewhat.  I'm not quite sure on what basis it is being argued that the bargain was illegal though - some kind of statutory right, I think.  Sounds a bit odd if so.


----------



## Mation (Jan 6, 2015)

He accepted a conviction on lesser charges, not on the original charges. That was the deal - the main charges were dropped and none of the people named could be charged either, as long as he accepted the lesser charges. Jane Does 1-3 are now bringing g a suit saying that the lawyers had no right to make that deal because they didn't agree and weren't even consulted.


----------



## Mation (Jan 6, 2015)

And all of that would make sense of the Palace's statement that Andrew Windsor would never try to influence an active case and specifically didn't in this particular case. There was no case on the charges involving Andrew. It never got to court, so technically they are telling the truth.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 6, 2015)

Diamond said:


> Didn't he accept some kind of conviction on the charges?  If so, there would have been no need to go to trial, as far as I understand it.
> 
> But yes, if the plea bargain was illegal, I agree that does muddy the waters somewhat.  I'm not quite sure on what basis it is being argued that the bargain was illegal though - some kind of statutory right, I think.  Sounds a bit odd if so.


The Crime Victims' Rights Act requires victims to be informed of plea deals. The basis of this case is that victims were not. It's not odd at all.


----------



## MAD-T-REX (Jan 6, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> Presumably the people who have been bought off will all have signed something to state that they won't testify against Epstein?


I'm unsure about American law, but a contractual term intended to stop someone from giving evidence in court would be unenforceable in the UK.



Mation said:


> As I understand, there has not been any criminal prosecution case heard on the charges that would have had a mandatory 10 year jail term if he was found guilty. Surely, if the deal made to drop those charges is illegal then he can be tried on them for the first time. The charge he pleaded guilty to and served time for wouldn't come into it.


He would have a reasonably good abuse of process argument in court (i.e. the prosecution are fucking about and should be forced to stop). 

There are good reasons to hold the prosecution to a promise not to prosecute, although English law has taken a more flexible approach in recent years. Prosecutors can now overturn decisions not to charge that were either wrong or unreasonable. 

I suspect that American courts are still rigid and the prosecution would be stopped.


----------



## Diamond (Jan 6, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> The Crime Victims' Rights Act requires victims to be informed of plea deals. The basis of this case is that victims were not. It's not odd at all.



Again, not familiar with this area specifically, but in general it is odd if there are impediments to the settlement of cases, particularly if it encourages the reinvigoration of matters that have already been brought to a conclusion.


----------



## Diamond (Jan 6, 2015)

MAD-T-REX said:


> I'm unsure about American law, but a contractual term intended to stop someone from giving evidence in court would be unenforceable in the UK.
> 
> 
> He would have a reasonably good abuse of process argument in court (i.e. the prosecution are fucking about and should be forced to stop).
> ...



Yeah, I don't know how you could reasonably run an argument to prosecute a guy who has already accepted a conviction on the same facts.

But I don't think any of this is really about getting anyone behind bars.  I suspect that the reason that they're seeking disclosure of some of the documents underlying the plea bargain is to strengthen their hand in some kind of negotiation.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 6, 2015)

Diamond said:


> Again, not familiar with this area specifically, but in general it is odd if there are impediments to the settlement of cases, particularly if it encourages the reinvigoration of matters that have already been brought to a conclusion.



What's odd about this: The Crime Victims' Rights Act requires victims to be informed of plea deals. The basis of this case is that victims were not. Quite straightforward.

What _is _odd is saying that something has happened _oh well, it's done now - can't be helped_. If it was odd to have another look despite evidence being presented and arguments being made etc , well that would be pretty damning of the system as a whole. But i suspect that's not the sort of odd you mean.


----------



## elbows (Jan 6, 2015)

Diamond said:


> That is a pretty odd development - either it means that Virginia Roberts has decided, at a pretty late stage, to try and disturb the plea bargain so as to reinstate a criminal prosecution, although that would seem impossible under the principle of double jeopardy which is a very important point, or else this is a tactical move in a wider battle, which seems far more likely to me.
> In conclusion, what this looks like to me, overall, is a very smart and fairly sharp move by Roberts' lawyers to exert leverage in some other negotiation, which is not public.



Lets not attribute too much to Virginia Roberts. She, along with another unnamed person, wants to be added to a case that already involved two other anonymous people. So she didn't instigate this strategy, although her involvement in the case now, and the details that inevitably come with that involvement, has obviously triggered the press attention of recent days.

I feel especially bound to make this point because according to the documents I've read this action started over 6 years ago, so it doesn't seem right to paint this legal stuff as being attempts to disturb the plea bargain at such a late stage.

eg:



> As the Court is aware, more than six years ago, Jane Doe #1 filed the present action against the Government, alleging a violation of her rights under the CVRA, 18 U.S.C. § 3771. DE1. She alleged that Jeffrey Epstein had sexually abused her and that the United States had entered into a secret non-prosecution agreement (NPA) regarding those crimes in violation of her rights. At the first court hearing on the case, the Court allowed Jane Doe #2 to also join the action. Both Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 specifically argued that the government had failed to protect their CVRA rights (inter alia) to confer, to reasonable notice, and to be treated with fairness. In response, the Government argued that the CVRA rights did not apply to Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 because no federal charges had ever been filed against Jeffrey Epstein.
> 
> The Court has firmly rejected the United States’ position. In a detailed ruling, the Court concluded that the CVRA extended rights to Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 even though federal charges were never filed. DE 189. The Court explained that because the NPA barred prosecution of crimes committed against them by Epstein, they had “standing” to assert violations of the CVRA rights. Id. The Court deferred ruling on whether the two victims would be entitled to relief, pending development of a fuller evidentiary record. Id.
> 
> Two other victims, who are in many respects similarly situated to the current victims, now wish to join this action. The new victims joining at this stage will not cause any delay and their joinder in this case is the most expeditious manner in which to pursue their rights. Because the background regarding their abuse is relevant to the Court’s assessment of whether to allow them to join, their circumstances are recounted here briefly.



Taken from http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/2015_0102_epsteindershowitz.pdf


----------



## Diamond (Jan 6, 2015)

Wow, it's been dragging on for 6 years!

They certainly take their time in the US, apparently...


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 6, 2015)

Diamond said:


> Wow, it's been dragging on for 6 years!
> 
> They certainly take their time in the US, apparently...


unfamiliar with bleak house i see


----------



## elbows (Jan 6, 2015)

hot air baboon said:


> ...as regards the timing of this issue would it be ridiculous to speculate if the whole post-Savile / Westminster paedo issue may have caused ripples across the Atlantic sufficient to have any bearing at all ...?



I can't answer that directly but I can add a couple of related themes:

The USA has had its own high-profile scandals and court cases, involving both sexual abuse/rape/minors and also issues of domestic violence have been in the news a lot. The most obvious examples would be Michael Jackson, and Jerry Sandusky the Penn State Uni football coach who was convicted of abusing boys over a 15 year period and received a very long sentence. And most recently the accusations against Bill Cosby which have certainly received fresh attention in a way never given to them in the past.

Regardless of whether this stuff is happening now because of momentum built up in the UK, the following fits absolutely perfectly with the best, most potentially helpful phenomenon of the post-Savile era:



> "These types of aggressive attacks on me are exactly the reason why sexual abuse victims typically remain silent and the reason why I did for a long time. That trend should change. I'm not going to be bullied back into silence," Roberts said through her lawyer, as reported by AAP.


----------



## Mation (Jan 6, 2015)

Diamond said:


> Yeah, I don't know how you could reasonably run an argument to prosecute a guy who has already accepted a conviction on the same facts.


They are not the same facts.

One subset of all the possible facts would have resulted in stronger changers and harsher sentencing. Another, smaller subset of the facts resulted in a lesser charge with lighter sentencing.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 6, 2015)

Diamond said:


> They certainly take their time in the US, apparently...



Lawyers charge by the hour, so they invairaby take as long as possible to do anything.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 6, 2015)

Diamond said:


> Wow, it's been dragging on for 6 years!
> 
> They certainly take their time in the US, apparently...


took more than 10 years to settle fairford. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-gloucestershire-21382889


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 6, 2015)

Diamond said:


> Yeah, I don't know how you could reasonably run an argument to prosecute a guy who has already accepted a conviction on the same facts.



You could argue that the original plea bargain was unlawful. It certainly sounds pretty suspect. I doubt a man without Epstein's money and connections would have been offered the same deal in light of the same evidence.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 6, 2015)

Mation said:


> He accepted a conviction on lesser charges, not on the original charges. That was the deal - the main charges were dropped *and none of the people named could be charged either*, as long as he accepted the lesser charges. Jane Does 1-3 are now bringing g a suit saying that the lawyers had no right to make that deal because they didn't agree and weren't even consulted.



I don't know how this can possibly hold water. Not to say that such a deal wasn't made, but if it was it makes no earthly sense.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 6, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> I don't know how this can possibly hold water. Not to say that such a deal wasn't made, but if it was it makes no earthly sense.


that's the law for you.


----------



## Diamond (Jan 6, 2015)

Mation said:


> They are not the same facts.
> 
> One subset of all the possible facts would have resulted in stronger changers and harsher sentencing. Another, smaller subset of the facts resulted in a lesser charge with lighter sentencing.



Not sure what you're getting at here.  If there's new evidence, then sure, that merits a review depending on how germane it is to the central elements of the case but, if there is no new evidence, then we're dealing with the same set of facts.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 6, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> that's the law for you.


bourgeois law


----------



## Mation (Jan 6, 2015)

Diamond said:


> Not sure what you're getting at here.  If there's new evidence, then sure, that merits a review depending on how germane it is to the central elements of the case but, if there is no new evidence, then we're dealing with the same set of facts.


Clear your mind of what you currently think.

There is one set of facts and no new evidence.

He was initially to be charged based on all of the facts they had. That would have resulted in a long custodial sentence.

But a deal was done and he was _not_ charged based on all of the facts. He was charged on some of them. Some were set aside.

So today, there is a set of facts - a subset of the initial group - that he has never been charged on. They have not come to court. He has not been tried on them.

If the deal is found illegal, he could theoretically (if not actually in US law) be tried on those charges which have not yet been brought, as it would be the first time they would be officially brought and heard in court.


----------



## Diamond (Jan 6, 2015)

Mation said:


> Clear your mind of what you currently think.
> 
> There is one set of facts and no new evidence.
> 
> ...



I think I see your point now and it's not actually in conflict with what I was putting forwards.

Put simply, there was a set of facts, which were evidenced.

From those sprung a number of potential charges.
_
All _of those charges and therefore _all_ of the facts were captured by the plea bargain, so the only way that the case can be re-examined in that same criminal context is if the bargain were to be disturbed, set aside, found to be illegal etc...

I think we're more or less saying the same thing but coming at it from different points of view.

e2a - of course the case might be re-examined if new evidence (_i.e. _new facts) came to light, but that doesn't seem to be happening here.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 6, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> unfamiliar with bleak house i see


I was just about to reference Jarndyce vs Jarndyce.


----------



## Mation (Jan 6, 2015)

Diamond said:


> I think I see your point now and it's not actually in conflict with what I was putting forwards.
> 
> Put simply, there was a set of facts, which were evidenced.
> 
> ...


We're getting somewhere 

Yes - if the plea bargain is found to be illegal, then yes, the case could (again, theoretically) be re-examined. And you are right, I think, that with new evidence it could be re-visited anyway.

You're being a little dishonest here though. Your original argument was that there must be some hidden motive for the current suit on the basis that the charges that were avoided could not be brought (again) and so they must be after something else.

I'd say that whether or not in US law the original charges can be brought, that there would be a straightforward case for the Janes to bring about the fact that no-one seems to have had their best interests at heart, and illegally so.

There may not be any mechanism in US law for them to get true justice, but its a valuable aim in and of itself to make sure people know what and why and how they were denied. And if they can't have any other justice then I won't begrudge them any penny they get instead.

edited for clarity.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 6, 2015)

Dershowitz

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/dershowitz-denies-sex-underage-girl-article-1.2066011



> The anti-Semites are crawling out from under their rocks, they are loving this," he told the newspaper. "And the anti-Israel zealots are loving this. I'm not only defending myself here but I am defending other values as well. I am defending the values that I have represented and stood for, for so many years."


----------



## Diamond (Jan 7, 2015)

Mation said:


> We're getting somewhere
> 
> Yes - if the plea bargain is found to be illegal, then yes, the case could (again, theoretically) be re-examined. And you are right, I think, that with new evidence it could be re-visited anyway.
> 
> ...



Thanks for the recognition of my line of my reasoning (and to be frank I am arguing a point that is not going to generate much sympathy - _i.e.  _when a thing is decided, it is done), but I am not saying that there is categorically an ulterior motive that is at play here but that is my general "feel" or "sense" of the matter.

And the best interests argument is interesting too.  That's troubling and my preliminary view is that that would be an access to justice issue.


----------



## Diamond (Jan 7, 2015)

On my understanding of US law, though, this is also massively complicated by the fact that a prosecutor is essentially a democratically elected individual.  

As far as I understand, they need to get "results" to make a reputation, which I think is far different from our system and accounts, largely, for the fact that persons get punished extremely severely in general in order to tick the hard on crime on box.

In that manner, US prosecutors are also politicians.


----------



## Fez909 (Jan 7, 2015)

Diamond said:


> On my understanding of US law, though, this is also massively complicated by the fact that a prosecutor is essentially a democratically elected individual.
> 
> As far as I understand, they need to get "results" to make a reputation, which I think is far different from our system and accounts, largely, for the fact that persons get punished extremely severely in general in order to tick the hard on crime on box.
> 
> In that manner, US prosecutors are also politicians.


That makes it even more suspicious that he was given such a light sentence.


Diamond said:


> (and to be frank I am arguing a point that is not going to generate much sympathy - _i.e. _when a thing is decided, it is done)


Let's pretend that Epstein bribed the prosecutor with £50m for a short stay in an open prison and the worst of his crimes hushed up in a plea bargain, giving him and his accomplice immunity. Even if the bribe became public knowledge, are you saying that the terms of the plea bargain should still stand?


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 7, 2015)

DexterTCN said:


> Dershowitz
> 
> http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/dershowitz-denies-sex-underage-girl-article-1.2066011


That's the Dershowitz we know and love. It's anti Semitic to accuse him of anything.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 7, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> That's the Dershowitz we know and love. It's anti Semitic to accuse him of anything.



Even plagiarism.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 7, 2015)

Dershovitz ramping it up now with defamation claims and saying he has an alibi.  It's hard to see Roberts surviving the onslaught, particularly as other potential witnesses have already been bought off.  Same time I can't see windsor taking up Dershovitz's suggestion that he too goes for defamation. He'll be _very_ keen for Dershovitz to do the heavy lifting on this.


----------



## teqniq (Jan 7, 2015)

I am hoping that Dershowitz is going to come seriously unstuck over this, he certainly deserves to.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 7, 2015)

teqniq said:


> I am hoping that Dershowitz is going to come seriously unstuck over this, he certainly deserves to.


i dunno, i'd like to see him on a sticky wicket


----------



## laptop (Jan 7, 2015)

laptop said:


> See also _Private Eye_ (_passim ad nauseam_) on the hate-filled rivalry between the _Mail_ and _Mail on Sunday.
> _
> I note that today's _Mail_ (edited by Dacre) isn't _very_ big on Da Prince_. _Yesterday's paper (edited by Geordie Greig) was.



Having seen Monday's and Tuesday's print front pages, I take that back.



laptop said:


> Today's paper has, however, gone big online on photos of a 14-year-old who's gone into modelling



But not that [/QUOTE]


----------



## elbows (Jan 7, 2015)

Wilf said:


> Dershovitz ramping it up now with defamation claims and saying he has an alibi.  It's hard to see Roberts surviving the onslaught, particularly as other potential witnesses have already been bought off.  Same time I can't see windsor taking up Dershovitz's suggestion that he too goes for defamation. He'll be _very_ keen for Dershovitz to do the heavy lifting on this.



He is now being sued for defaming the lawyers 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-30708795



> In media interviews, Mr Dershowitz accused Ms Roberts' lawyers, Paul Cassell and Bradley Edwards, of "unethical" behaviour warranting disbarment.
> 
> The pair said their reputations had been damaged by such comments and that they were seeking damages.


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 7, 2015)

Reminds me of a South Park episode where everyone sues everyone else.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 7, 2015)

'Those who aren't hanging are hanging someone else...'


----------



## gosub (Jan 7, 2015)

elbows said:


> He is now being sued for defaming the lawyers
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-30708795


They will win that easily.


----------



## laptop (Jan 7, 2015)

gosub said:


> They will win that easily.



They should...

Also: surely Dershowitz, in suing for libel over a sex-related allegation, has committed the Oscar Wilde Error? I do hope so...


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 7, 2015)

gosub said:


> They will win that easily.


Neither of the jane doe lawyers have a blemish on their names and have very good reputations, they are also entitled to believe their client and cannot be reasonably accused of defamation.

Dershowitz' over-reaction seems telling.


----------



## teqniq (Jan 7, 2015)

Jeffrey Epstein scandal: women with new identities run firms from Epstein-linked property



> Two of Jeffrey Epstein’s alleged accomplices are running businesses from a Manhattan property linked to the wealthy sex offender under new identities, years after appearing to have left his scandal-plagued entourage.
> 
> Nada Marcinkova and Sarah Kellen, who were questioned by lawyers about whether Prince Andrew had any involvement in Epstein’s abuse of underage girls, have since reinvented themselves as Nadia Marcinko and Sarah Kensington.
> 
> ...


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 7, 2015)

teqniq said:


> Jeffrey Epstein scandal: women with new identities run firms from Epstein-linked property


This should be shooting fish in a barrel, shouldn't it?

More and more will be revealed, surely.

These people are so rich and powerful (not the girls) they can't have cared too much about covering their tracks because they are almost advertising it.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jan 7, 2015)

I love it when comics get things right.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 7, 2015)

Alan Dershowitz's Curious Denials: 

http://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/395894/alan-dershowitzs-curious-denials-ed-whelan


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 7, 2015)

Norman Finkelstein - On Lies and Liars: http://normanfinkelstein.com/2015/01/06/on-lies-and-liars/


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 7, 2015)

Alan Dershowitz's affidavit on accusations in the Jane Doe/Jeffrey Epstein/Prince Andrew lawsuit. 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/8u567bvdshn9mj3/Alan Dershowitz affidavit.pdf?dl=0


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 8, 2015)

Who were the (four people)?


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 8, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> Alan Dershowitz's affidavit on accusations in the Jane Doe/Jeffrey Epstein/Prince Andrew lawsuit.
> 
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/8u567bvdshn9mj3/Alan Dershowitz affidavit.pdf?dl=0


So he files an affidavit (a legal document) saying...



> .. I believe and allege that their bad faith purpose was to have this false charge made public, while denying me any legal recourse..



recourse=the use of (someone or something) as a source of help in a difficult situation

/massive rolleyes smiley


----------



## newbie (Jan 8, 2015)

> I believe and allege that they deliberately inserted this false and defamatory charge,which they knew or should have known to be false and defamatory, in a legal pleading that does not seek an evidentiary hearing or provide for any other opportunity for me to respond to, rebut or disprove their knowingly false charge. They placed it in a legal proceeding, in a public filing, in bad faith in an effort to have the media report it, while they hide behind claims of litigation and journalistic privilege. I believe and allege that their bad faith purpose was to have this false charge made public, while denying me any legal recourse. There is no realistic possibility that this pre-New Year’s filing would have been picked up by the media had they or some one on their behalf not deliberately allerted the media to its existence.



American formal language is very odd but I can't see any problem with the use of the word 'recourse' in that passage.


His use of the word  'depose' earlier is very peculiar.



> In a statement issued to the press, Jane Doe #3’s lawyers, Brad Edwards and Paul Cassell, have falsely stated that “they tried to depose Mr. Dershowitz on these subjects, although he has avoided those deposition requests”.
> By using the term “these subjects” in a satement about the sexual abuse charges recently made against me, these lawyers have falsely implied that they sought to depose me on allegations regarding my own conduct. That is a total and categorical lie. Several years ago they wrote, asking to depose me on Jeffrey Epstein’s activities and whether I ever witnessed any of his alleged crimes.



if "prince" andrew or his mum were to use that word it would have a wholly different meaning


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 8, 2015)

DexterTCN said:


> Who were the (four people)?


The 4 Jane Does?  I think we only know one of their names.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 8, 2015)

newbie said:


> American formal language is very odd <snippage>
> His use of the word  'depose' earlier is very peculiar.
> 
> if "prince" andrew or his mum were to use that word it would have a wholly different meaning


 Nah, it just means 'seek to make Dershowitz a deponent' or 'force him to make a deposition'. cf the US usage of the verb 'protest', where protesting say, Christianity, may equally mean protesting against it as declaring one's adherence. Context is all.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 8, 2015)

Mind you, in an amusing slip, he did say on CNN that he'd "categorically deny the truth".

http://edition.cnn.com/videos/tv/20...itz-prince-andrew-sex-scandal-allegations.cnn


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 8, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> The 4 Jane Does?  I think we only know one of their names.


No, the 4 men that were part of the original plea bargain by epstein which meant no charges would be brought against them.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 8, 2015)

DexterTCN said:


> No, the 4 men that were part of the original plea bargain by epstein which meant no charges would be brought against them.


Oh, right.  No, we don't know that yet.  Well, I don't.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 8, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> Mind you, in an amusing slip, he did say on CNN that he'd "categorically deny the truth".
> 
> http://edition.cnn.com/videos/tv/20...itz-prince-andrew-sex-scandal-allegations.cnn


i don't know why you think that was a _slip, _surely merely a statement of fact


----------



## laptop (Jan 8, 2015)

Makes the cover of _Private Eye _but I have yet to find more than a teensy passing reference inside


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 8, 2015)

laptop said:


> Makes the cover of _Private Eye _but I have yet to find more than a teensy passing reference inside


hint: turn the pages.


----------



## laptop (Jan 8, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> hint: turn the pages.



I did.

Are the pages in the office copy stuck together _already_?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 8, 2015)

laptop said:


> I did.
> 
> Are the pages in the office copy stuck together _already_?


you had it last, you'd know


----------



## laptop (Jan 8, 2015)

I've been out and bought my own copy.







Inside I find:
p5: A reference to the Mail online drooling over a 17-year-old
p6: "Asparamancer" Jemima Packington predicting "Royal family embroiled in a scandal"
p7: Eye cover from 2011 with Andrew announcing "Epstein is prepared to give you £11k" and Fergie asking "Is that for Eugenie or both of them?"

That's it. Nothing new. Odd.


----------



## Diamond (Jan 8, 2015)

They didn't run anything about Rotherham either, despite having a large section devoted to local government.

Sometimes the Eye just has blind spots.

I wouldn't read too much into it (no pun intended).


----------



## Wilf (Jan 8, 2015)

laptop said:


> cover from 2011 with Andrew announcing "Epstein is prepared to give you £11k" and Fergie asking "Is that for Eugenie or both of them?"


 Actually, even if it is private eye, that's rather good.


----------



## twentythreedom (Jan 8, 2015)

> *Buckingham Palace has issued a strong denial that the Duke of York, Prince Andrew, has been involved in bizarre hill marching based sexual practices.*



http://newsthump.com/2015/01/05/duke-of-york-strenuously-denies-he-had-ten-thousand-men/


----------



## Mation (Jan 8, 2015)

twentythreedom said:


> http://newsthump.com/2015/01/05/duke-of-york-strenuously-denies-he-had-ten-thousand-men/


Where did they get that idea, I wonder?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 10, 2015)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-30759303

poor fella , lookslike hes gone shopping to take his mind off the stress of being added to the internets nonce list






£8-13M estimated


----------



## brogdale (Jan 10, 2015)

not-bono-ever said:


> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-30759303
> 
> poor fella , lookslike hes gone shopping to take his mind off the stress of being added to the internets nonce list
> 
> ...


That Sovereign Grant must be good.


----------



## tony heath (Jan 10, 2015)

Perhaps the Swiss won't easily agree to extradition as easily as the British, he's detested here.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 11, 2015)

A roundup on Epstein from the Graun, drawing on several sources including the Vanity Fair article but containing only internal links. Nevertheless, a useful overview of the world in which our noble Prince dallied.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jan/10/jeffrey-epstein-decade-scandal-prince-andrew

Only tangentially relevant but also worth a look for more background on Epstein's modus operandi, the chilling follow-up to Vicky Ward's Vanity Fair article:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...eazy-billionaire-jeffrey-epstein-in-2002.html


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 13, 2015)

More on Dershowitz from Electronic Intifada.


> With the police investigation heating up in 2006, Epstein’s team went on the offensive, bullying and harassing witnesses, victims and their families into silence.
> 
> Going far beyond the typical role of a lawyer, Dershowitz mobilized a pre-emptive smear campaign against the victims, mining their pages on the social network MySpace for comments relating to marijuana and alcohol use, which he printed out and compiled into dossiers for the police and state attorney’s office in a salacious attempt to tarnish the credibility of Epstein’s accusers.
> 
> ...



Get him!


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 13, 2015)

nino_savatte said:


> More on Dershowitz from Electronic Intifada.
> 
> 
> Get him!


the day dershowitz gets fucked over is the day i go to the nicer of the two offies on auld compton street, get their finest bottle of calvados and treat myself to a drop.


----------



## The Pale King (Jan 13, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> the day dershowitz gets fucked over is the day i go to the nicer of the two offies on auld compton street, get their finest bottle of calvados and treat myself to a drop.



I'll see you there


----------



## Zabo (Jan 14, 2015)

More revelations. Diary released. No doubt forensics will prove the time of writing.

“He was the most incredibly hideous dancer I had ever seen and not to mention how embarrassing it was to have to be the one he was smashing pelvics with, even if he was a prince.”

“We only stayed at the club for a little over an hour before his highness was dripping from sweat and ready to embark to another quieter setting, where we could get to know each other better, and from the way he was fondling me on the dance floor, I knew that was a man’s polite way of saying he wanted to intimately get acquainted."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...details-of-her-contact-with-Duke-of-York.html

http://radaronline.com/exclusives/2...leged-sex-prince-andrew-diary-details-hookup/


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 14, 2015)

BBC news headline: Diary Of Lies Released By Lying Whore In Doomed Attempt To Besmirch Valiant Prince.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 18, 2015)

> *Prince Andrew considering public statement about sex allegations*
> Duke of York understood to be deciding on whether to make speech at Davos forum over alleged ‘sexual relations’ with 17-year-old linked to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein



Lol...desperate.

I see the loathsome sycophant Baron Cunt of Islamingham has wedged his tongue right up there...


> Sir Digby Jones, former director general of the CBI and trade minister under Gordon Brown’s Labour government, defended the prince’s attendance, saying he was “_innocent until proven guilty_”.



Which is not really correct anyway. Someone has said York is a rapey nonce. If that's not true he take take action to clear his name; then, if successful, he would be able to claim he was innocent.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jan 19, 2015)

http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/re...aedophile-tycoon/story-fnixwvgh-1227187589517

Details  may be released about the efforts Windsor went to on behalf of his nonce chum. Some of the photos in the piece domt show him in a flattering light.


----------



## laptop (Jan 21, 2015)

> Lawyers acting for the woman who alleges she was forced by a billionaire financier to have sex with Prince Andrew when she was 17 are formally requesting that he respond to her accusations under oath*.*
> 
> A letter addressed to Andrew at Buckingham Palace asking him to take part in a two-hour interview was filed with a court in Florida on Wednesday.
> 
> ...



Odds on that happening...


----------



## Zabo (Jan 22, 2015)

I heard Digby Jones saying on R4 that Andrew Windsor is doing a great deal for young people. I can't quite remember in which particular role.

Update on the lawyer letter. Apparently, following the advice of Elvis Presley, it has been returned to sender by B Palace - unopened.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/p...ide-of-the-story-in-court-papers-9994051.html


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 22, 2015)

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/p...-at-davos-my-focus-is-on-my-work-9996524.html

Looks like he issued another denial during a speech at Davos....where he is not representing the UK or anyone, he's there in a private capacity.	Which I think is a fib.   

Isn't it about time he had a carefully scripted, state-controlled interview?


----------



## bemused (Jan 22, 2015)

When is says papers filed in court, what have they actually filed for? Criminal charges or are they suing him?


----------



## quiquaquo (Jan 22, 2015)

Disgusted to to see that fat cunt Tony Fernandes (QPR and Air Asia owner) grovelling to Andrew on TV news tonight.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 22, 2015)

bemused said:


> When is says papers filed in court, what have they actually filed for? Criminal charges or are they suing him?


Nah...it's a challenge that he doesn't have to respond to.   Answer her lawyers questions under oath, he would probably get to see them (the questions) before-hand.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 22, 2015)

Who really believes this cunt did not do all he is accused of and more? Fucking rapist.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 23, 2015)

The mail have done one of those front page juxtaposition things that they do...



Spoiler: image of Mail front page (not linked, though)


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 23, 2015)

TopCat said:


> Who really believes this cunt did not do all he is accused of and more?



It was like finding out Liberace was gay.


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 23, 2015)

Innocent until proven guilty is bollocks in this case because it's unlikely to ever see a day in court. Can't help but see some similarities between this and Assange although Prince Andrew won't have to literally hide in an embassy.


----------



## Idris2002 (Jan 23, 2015)

Now it looks like Bill Clinton is in the frame with this pair of shites:

http://gawker.com/flight-logs-put-c..._medium=recirculation&utm_campaign=thursdayPM


----------



## Belushi (Jan 23, 2015)

phildwyer said:


> It was like finding out Liberace was gay.



No!


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 23, 2015)

Idris2002 said:


> Now it looks like Bill Clinton is in the frame with this pair of shites:
> 
> http://gawker.com/flight-logs-put-c..._medium=recirculation&utm_campaign=thursdayPM



Sadly the more bigwigs that get dragged into this the less likely it is that any of them will be brough to book for any of it.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 23, 2015)

clinton or nixon, who goes down as the biggest liar to get caught


----------



## Idris2002 (Jan 23, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> clinton or nixon, who goes down as the biggest liar to get caught



The thought of B.Clinton "going down" is not one I wish to dwell on.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 23, 2015)

bemused said:


> When is says papers filed in court, what have they actually filed for? Criminal charges or are they suing him?



He has been 'invited' to answer some questions under oath. 

No doubt Roberts' lawyers know full well that Andrew is not going to do anything of the sort, it's all just part of mummery. At some point they'll be able to stand in front of a judge and say 'we asked him to answer these questions under oath but he declined' as part of some broader argument, and probably that's all they hope to get out of it.


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 23, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> Sadly the more bigwigs that get dragged into this the less likely it is that any of them will be brough to book for any of it.



Probably. Although Epstein having been convicted and Clinton - being caught having extra-curricular activities in the White House with Monica Lewinsky previously - being involved can only add weight to the accusations.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 23, 2015)

Made me so angry the way this was reported on R4 this morning.  They were reporting it as if he had definitely done nothing and the whole issue was nothing but an image problem.  There was a parade of fuckers from Davos saying things like, "Yah, Andrew just needs to improve his image" leading me to shout "and, just maybe, stop fucking under aged girls!" at the radio.  Shitbags, the lot of them.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Jan 23, 2015)

All these high profile male public figures standing behind Handy Andy need to be added to the operation Yewtree to-do list pronto.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 23, 2015)

kabbes said:


> Made me so angry the way this was reported on R4 this morning.  They were reporting it as if he had definitely done nothing and the whole issue was nothing but an image problem.  There was a parade of fuckers from Davos saying things like, "Yah, Andrew just needs to improve his image" leading me to shout "and, just maybe, stop fucking under aged girls!" at the radio.  Shitbags, the lot of them.


the establishment closing ranks ennit


----------



## bemused (Jan 23, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Innocent until proven guilty is bollocks in this case because it's unlikely to ever see a day in court. Can't help but see some similarities between this and Assange although Prince Andrew won't have to literally hide in an embassy.



I'm still not sure if this is a civil case or a criminal case?


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jan 23, 2015)

kabbes said:


> Made me so angry the way this was reported on R4 this morning.  They were reporting it as if he had definitely done nothing and the whole issue was nothing but an image problem.  There was a parade of fuckers from Davos saying things like, "Yah, Andrew just needs to improve his image" leading me to shout "and, just maybe, stop fucking under aged girls!" at the radio.  Shitbags, the lot of them.



One of the people interviewed also basically described him as dull, thick and loyal...a thoroughly decent chap.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## kabbes (Jan 23, 2015)

Louis MacNeice said:


> One of the people interviewed also basically described him as dull, thick and loyal...a thoroughly decent chap.
> 
> Cheers - Louis MacNeice


Yes, that amused me.  She said it more than once too.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jan 23, 2015)

kabbes said:


> Yes, that amused me.  She said it more than once too.



Obviously better to be thought of as Tim Nice But Dim rather than the ugly alternative.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 23, 2015)

kabbes said:


> Made me so angry the way this was reported on R4 this morning.  They were reporting it as if he had definitely done nothing and the whole issue was nothing but an image problem.  There was a parade of fuckers from Davos saying things like, "Yah, Andrew just needs to improve his image" leading me to shout "and, just maybe, stop fucking under aged girls!" at the radio.  Shitbags, the lot of them.



More likely they just mean he should stop _getting caught_ fucking underage girls


----------



## Diamond (Jan 23, 2015)

bemused said:


> I'm still not sure if this is a civil case or a criminal case?


 
It's a bit betwixt and between as far as I understand.

The instant case is largely procedural, in that it's an application for disclosure regarding a plea bargain that Epstein struck with the prosecutors, which arguably infringed statutory rights.  So the underlying matter is a criminal prosecution but this proceeding goes towards the details of that settlement deal, which would appear to be a civil issue.


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 23, 2015)

bemused said:


> I'm still not sure if this is a civil case or a criminal case?



Surely in the US one generally follows the other with these sort of matters? Unless the civil case is hush money.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 23, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Surely in the US one generally follows the other with these sort of matters? Unless the civil case is hush money.



I'm guessing 'hush money' is out of the question given that so much has already been made public. If you want hush money, you settle out of court.


----------



## Diamond (Jan 23, 2015)

Diamond said:


> It's a bit betwixt and between as far as I understand.
> 
> The instant case is largely procedural, in that it's an application for disclosure regarding a plea bargain that Epstein struck with the prosecutors, which arguably infringed statutory rights.  So the underlying matter is a criminal prosecution but this proceeding goes towards the details of that settlement deal, which would appear to be a civil issue.


 
Actually, I'm not so sure about that now.

I think the claimants are seeking both disclosure and damages from the US government, which falls pretty squarely in the civil box.


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 23, 2015)

Wolveryeti said:


> All these high profile male public figures standing behind Handy Andy need to be added to the operation Yewtree to-do list pronto.



Not just male this time.  This Maxwell woman seems like a piece of work.


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 23, 2015)

Louis MacNeice said:


> One of the people interviewed also basically described him as dull, thick and loyal...



Two out of three's not bad.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jan 23, 2015)

phildwyer said:


> Two out of three's not bad.



You're looking good there Phil.







Cheers - Louis MacNeice
http://


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 23, 2015)

Idris2002 said:


> Now it looks like Bill Clinton is in the frame with this pair of shites:
> 
> http://gawker.com/flight-logs-put-c..._medium=recirculation&utm_campaign=thursdayPM



Jesus Christ the lives these people lead:

"In 2002, as _New York_ has reported, Clinton recruited Epstein to make his plane available for a week-long anti-poverty and anti-AIDS tour of Africa with Kevin Spacey, Chris Tucker, billionaire creep Ron Burkle, Clinton confidant Gayle Smith (who now serves on Barack Obama's National Security Council), and others. The logs from that trip show that Maxwell, Kellen, and a woman named Chauntae Davis joined the entourage for five days."

Now that's what I call a vacation!  A week-long, airborne, trans-African campaign to eradicate both AIDS *and *poverty by flying orgy, spearheaded by the dregs of Hollywood, a planeload of hookers and the most notorious philanderer in the Western world.

Wtf do they take us for?


----------



## killer b (Jan 23, 2015)

you can't really call Spacey the dregs of hollywood tbf. He's one of the finest and most successful actors of his generation.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 23, 2015)

killer b said:


> you can't really call Spacey the dregs of hollywood tbf. He's one of the finest and most successful actors of his generation.


And yet now irrevocably tarnished.


----------



## killer b (Jan 23, 2015)

fine and successful actors are quite often revolting scum tbf.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 23, 2015)

American Beauty was ruined by that 'bag in the wind' shit


----------



## Betsy (Jan 23, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> American Beauty was ruined by that 'bag in the wind' shit


I loved that.


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 23, 2015)

killer b said:


> you can't really call Spacey the dregs of hollywood tbf. He's one of the finest and most successful actors of his generation.



Cool.  So what possesses him to imagine that he can help eliminate African poverty by taking out permanent membership of the mile-high club in the company of billionaire crooks and thugs?

He may be a decent actor, but he's still the dregs of Hollywood.


----------



## Belushi (Jan 23, 2015)

Isnt Spacey gay?


----------



## Wilf (Jan 23, 2015)

phildwyer said:


> Cool.  So what possesses him to imagine that he can help eliminate African poverty by taking out permanent membership of the mile-high club in the company of billionaire crooks and thugs?
> 
> He may be a decent actor, but he's still the dregs of Hollywood.


You appear to be one of those weird people who think poverty can only be eliminated by significant socio-economic change.


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 23, 2015)

Belushi said:


> Isnt Spacey gay?



Maybe that's why he was invited? More female teenage hookers for the rest of them to choose from.


----------



## el-ahrairah (Jan 23, 2015)

i'm sure they would have brought along a young lad or two for kevin.  they're a charitable lot.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 23, 2015)

Wilf said:


> You appear to be one of those weird people who think poverty can only be eliminated by significant socio-economic change.


the elimination of poverty *is* significant socio-economic change


----------



## Wilf (Jan 23, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> the elimination of poverty *is* significant socio-economic change


I know.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 23, 2015)

Wilf said:


> I know.


but moves to eliminate it run counter to god's plan: 'the poor will always be with us'


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 23, 2015)

kabbes said:


> And yet now irrevocably tarnished.


He's a typical US liberal, no? Opposed to the idea of poverty in principle, but also opposed to the idea that his wealth and that of other rich people is part of the problem.


----------



## killer b (Jan 23, 2015)

just a typical liberal then.


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 23, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> He's a typical US liberal, no? Opposed to the idea of poverty in principle, but also opposed to the idea that his wealth and that of other rich people is part of the problem.



That's not what I really object to though.  That's understandable, and probably universal among the privileged.

The problem for me is this assumption that he can solve the problems of the world by jetting around Africa in an airborne bordello in the company of billionaire paedophiles and bomber of Khartoum.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 23, 2015)

phildwyer said:


> That's not what I really object to though.  That's understandable, and probably universal among the privileged.
> 
> The problem for me is this assumption that he can solve the problems of the world by jetting around Africa in an airborne bordello in the company of billionaire paedophiles and bomber of Khartoum.


It's absurd and grotesque, but it follows from the idea that poverty is in no way linked to wealth, which itself is an absurd position. The 'Bono fallacy'.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jan 23, 2015)

phildwyer said:


> That's not what I really object to though.  That's understandable, and probably universal among the privileged.
> 
> The problem for me is this assumption that he can solve the problems of the world by jetting around Africa in an airborne bordello in the company of billionaire paedophiles and bomber of Khartoum.



And that's where you've got it arse about face; the big problem isn't his misconception about his abilities but  rather his incomprehension about the structure he benefits from.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 23, 2015)

See also: millionaires eating lavish banquets to raise money for the hungry.


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 23, 2015)

They can eradicate _some_ poverty by looking at lucrative investments which has readily available cheap labour to service. The rich justify their wealth to themselves by things like job creation. They are wealth creators in their eyes.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 23, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> They can eradicate _some_ poverty by looking at lucrative investments which has readily available cheap labour to service. The rich justify their wealth to themselves by things like job creation. They are wealth creators in their eyes.


Indeed. The poor would be _even poorer_ without their efforts.

Ironic, really, that people who would cast scorn on Ayn Rand are really following her logic to a tee. Who is John Galt?


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jan 23, 2015)

There are some people who simply don't deserve oxygen: Epstein, Andrew and Dershowitz are three of such people.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 23, 2015)

The concept being floated in the media that the rapist may have immunity if he is royal is gobsmacking.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jan 23, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> They can eradicate _some_ poverty by looking at lucrative investments which has readily available cheap labour to service. The rich justify their wealth to themselves by things like job creation. *They are wealth creators in their eyes.*



Value vampires; he undead totally reliant on the lives of others for their survival if only they'd recognise it/have it forced upon them.*

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

*as we all are mutually dependent.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jan 23, 2015)

TopCat said:


> The concept being floated in the media that the rapist may have immunity if he is royal is gobsmacking.



Surely the category 'royal' demands just this sort of privilege...which tells you all you need need to know abut its social utility.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## Ponyutd (Jan 23, 2015)

Just as an aside:- Why do you do that thing with your name?

Cheers - ponyutd


----------



## Santino (Jan 23, 2015)

Cheers!


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 23, 2015)

Ponyutd said:


> Just as an aside:- Why do you do that thing with your name?
> 
> Cheers - ponyutd



He's the only one that editor trust with a signature.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 23, 2015)

cheers all round  - Pickman's model


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 23, 2015)

Bugger, I thought you were all toasting the news of Andrew's arrest for noncery. 

Turns out you're just taking the piss out of Louis


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 23, 2015)

TopCat said:


> The concept being floated in the media that the rapist may have immunity if he is royal is gobsmacking.



Did anyone here think any different? Maybe in law there is no immunity for royals, but the law can be ignored whenever necessary and it frequently is for far less 'important' people than a prince.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 23, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> Bugger, I thought you were all toasting the news of Andrew's arrest for noncery.
> 
> Turns out you're just taking the piss out of Louis


we will toast andrew's sorry end, bleeding out in a dark corner in an american jail


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 23, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> we will toast andrew's sorry end, bleeding out in a dark corner in an american jail



I only hope Brenda lives to see it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 23, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> I only hope Brenda lives to see it.


lives to see it? wouldn't be surprised if the cold-hearted crone will have ordered it.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jan 23, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> Bugger, I thought you were all toasting the news of Andrew's arrest for noncery.
> 
> Turns out you're just taking the piss out of Louis



And there was me thinking they were taking an interest.

Not so cheery - Louis MacNeice


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 28, 2015)

This is brilliant...Epstein finally speaks.

Apparently he (and no doubt others) don't want publication of...



> thousands of pages of correspondence between his lawyers and US prosecutors



and he is citing...



> the 1978 US supreme court ruling in favour of former president Richard Nixon’s and his efforts to prevent television networks access to his secret White House recordings.



http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...r-attacks-on-him-and-associates-10006666.html


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 28, 2015)

> The lawyers said Mr Epstein could be “irreparably harmed” if such letters and emails were made public.



Well then perhaps he should've thought of that before he abused underage girls then hired an army of lawyers to help him avoid prosecution. It's not the documents that are the problem, it's the crimes they relate to, crimes for which Esptein probably deserves to be 'irreparably damaged' insofar as he hasn't been already.


----------



## Citizen66 (Feb 24, 2015)

The smear campaign begins:



> It has now been revealed that just months before she was introduced to convicted-pedophile Epstein, then 14-year-old Roberts accused two acquaintances of rape.
> 
> The Daily News uncovered court records which show prosecutors decided not to press formal charges due to Roberts' 'lack of credibility' as a victim.



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ree-years-joined-Jeffrey-Epstein-s-harem.html


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 24, 2015)

So because her original attackers weren't prosecuted, that means her allegations against Epstein and pals can't be trusted?

I can't quite get my head around how wrong that is. Presumably the argument is that drinking and smoking pot makes you more likely to manufacture accusations of rape, and if you were drunk or high at the time you were attacked then nobody should be expected to believe you. From which rapists might well conclude that they need only get their victims drunk to ensure immunity from prosecution.


----------



## Citizen66 (Feb 24, 2015)

Epstein got convicted which sort of flies against her being some kind of liar. Epstein the Paedo. Prince Andrew's close mate.


----------



## dessiato (Feb 24, 2015)

Apropos of nothing in particular, I've visited Andrew's house a few times. He always seemed to be odd. I wouldn't be surprised if he is guilty. I imagine his defence to be something along the lines of "But I'm royalty and can do what I like" I don't like him much, as you might be able to tell.


----------



## DotCommunist (Feb 24, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> The smear campaign begins:
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ree-years-joined-Jeffrey-Epstein-s-harem.html


I know whose word I give more credence too, and it isn't the convicted nonce or the man of such privilege he probably has very different take on age of consent laws and consent in general.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 24, 2015)

I'd be very surprised if his defence (if it ever comes to that - he's charged with nothing, he's just been named) will consist _I'm royalty and can do what I like!_


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 24, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> I'd be very surprised if his defence (if it ever comes to that - he's charged with nothing, he's just been named) will consist _I'm royalty and can do what I like!_


it will until his lawyers point out how holey that is in a land without royalty


----------



## DotCommunist (Feb 24, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> I'd be very surprised if his defence (if it ever comes to that - he's charged with nothing, he's just been named) will consist _I'm royalty and can do what I like!_


its not likely to ever come to that is it, even were he charged with anything the US demanding a royal answer to their jurisdiction is just never going to happen


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 24, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> its not likely to ever come to that is it, even were he charged with anything the US demanding a royal answer to their jurisdiction is just never going to happen


I doubt it, but who knows.


----------



## Citizen66 (Feb 24, 2015)

Would be very embarrassing for the Royals and crossing the US off places to jet to might be a tad inconvenient.


----------



## DotCommunist (Feb 24, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Would be very embarrassing for the Royals and crossing the US off places to jet to might be a tad inconvenient.


it wouldn't happen. Conversations would be had. Assurances given. Law doesn't  apply to these people, thats not how it works


----------



## Citizen66 (Feb 24, 2015)

I quite liked that the Royals' response to all this was to _promote_ Prince Andrew. My eyes were just drawn to the word Vice. 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31435934



DotCommunist said:


> it wouldn't happen. Conversations would be had. Assurances given. Law doesn't  apply to these people, thats not how it works



True. Although it didn't save Mark Thatcher.


----------



## DotCommunist (Feb 24, 2015)

the scions of the petite bourgeoisie aren't royalty.

anyway, everyone knows attempting a coup is way worse than coercive sex with an underage person. Right....


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 24, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> it wouldn't happen. Conversations would be had. Assurances given. Law doesn't  apply to these people, thats not how it works



Whereas this is 100% how the law should work...



dessiato said:


> I've visited Andrew's house a few times. He always seemed to be odd. I wouldn't be surprised if he is guilty.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 9, 2019)

Bit of a crowd pleaser, this one; Lady Ghislaine, Captain Bob, Windsor jnr, Epstein, Trump, Clinton & Dershowitz all in one hit.

Jeffrey Epstein: large tranche of files released in Ghislaine Maxwell lawsuit

House!


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 9, 2019)

brogdale said:


> House!


Hugh Laurie too?


----------



## brogdale (Aug 9, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Hugh Laurie too?


Nooooo

Or whatever you lot call in Northern British bingo halls; "housie, housie"?


----------



## tim (Aug 9, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> it wouldn't happen. Conversations would be had. Assurances given. Law doesn't  apply to these people, thats not how it works



No more massages for Randy Andy just one big final debilitating or fatal stroke. Face must be saved.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 10, 2019)

Today's Guardian:


----------



## tim (Aug 10, 2019)

Epstein kills himself or so it seems

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/aug/10/jeffrey-epstein-dead-prison-report-latest

No wonder we've heard so little of Prince Philip recently. He's been undercover in a US jail


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 10, 2019)

He dead

Paedophile billionaire Jeffrey Epstein 'found dead' in US prison ahead of trial


----------



## mwgdrwg (Aug 10, 2019)

How many would've gone down with him, we can now only wonder.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 10, 2019)

mwgdrwg said:


> How many would've gone down with him, we can now only wonder.


Hope he's left a few notes


----------



## mystic pyjamas (Aug 10, 2019)

How Convenient.
Read somewhere that he tried to top himself earlier in the week. Surely he must’ve been on suicide watch.


----------



## tim (Aug 10, 2019)

mystic pyjamas said:


> How Convenient.



How predictable.

How Stephen Ward.


----------



## agricola (Aug 10, 2019)

Cui bono?  Bono?


----------



## andysays (Aug 10, 2019)

Jeffrey Epstein 'found dead in cell'


----------



## Johnny Vodka (Aug 10, 2019)

Hmmm


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 10, 2019)

Johnny Vodka said:


> Hmmm


_Are you thinking what I'm thinking?
_
Anyway, this is still just a bit too "in plain sight".


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Aug 10, 2019)




----------



## badseed (Aug 10, 2019)

The conspiracy theories don't seem so far fetched with this one


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Aug 10, 2019)

I guess even suicide watchers need a lunch break.....


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 10, 2019)

badseed said:


> The conspiracy theories don't seem so far fetched with this one


“The circumstances of his death are unclear. He was reportedly on suicide watch following a phone call with the Palace after the body was found”.


----------



## spanglechick (Aug 10, 2019)

Might maxwell now be of a mind to spill the beans, I wonder, since she can paint it as all Epstein’s fault?


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 10, 2019)

badseed said:


> The conspiracy theories don't seem so far fetched with this one


In the end it doesn't matter if he died as a result of a conspiracy, or as a result of a truly startling level of incompetence. The fact is that a lot of rotten people are going to be wriggling off the hook now. . . or so they might think. I'm still hoping for something more to come. Anyway, we already know enough from this case to be able to say _we know what you are and what you did._


----------



## campanula (Aug 10, 2019)

Massive RW scramble to emphasise links with Clinton. Hmmm


----------



## moochedit (Aug 10, 2019)

andysays said:


> Jeffrey Epstein 'found dead in cell'



Conspiratastic


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 10, 2019)

Well, that's nice.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 10, 2019)

mwgdrwg said:


> How many would've gone down with him, we can now only wonder.


It's not beyond the realm of probability that other people, perhaps with a little more power to influence things, were wondering the very same question.


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 10, 2019)

I kind of thought the whole point of suicide watch was that you intervened to stop it not just sit there and watch them actually do it.
The world has lost nothing in the death of Jeffrey Epstein. I've always laughed at conspiracy theories but this smells worse  than an expired curry.


----------



## tim (Aug 10, 2019)

spanglechick said:


> Might maxwell now be of a mind to spill the beans, I wonder, since she can paint it as all Epstein’s fault?



Her beans will be spilt first. 

Bob Bob Bob!


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 10, 2019)

andysays said:


> Jeffrey Epstein 'found dead in cell'



Oh fuck this is never gonna end now.


----------



## teqniq (Aug 10, 2019)

how very convenient


----------



## not-bono-ever (Aug 10, 2019)




----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 10, 2019)

andysays said:


> Jeffrey Epstein 'found dead in cell'



Funny how the convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein is still titled 'financier' even though it's far from clear he was ever more than a con man, and even though there are far more salient descriptors available.


----------



## Johnny Vodka (Aug 10, 2019)

Idris2002 said:


> _Are you thinking what I'm thinking?
> _
> Anyway, this is still just a bit too "in plain sight".



Come on, you've got POTUS, who has been taped talking about grabbing women by the pussy.  Nothing too far fetched here.  It's certainly a possibility.


----------



## andysays (Aug 10, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> I kind of thought the whole point of suicide watch was that you intervened to stop it not just sit there and watch them actually do it...


Oh shit, did we forget to explain that to the new guy we assigned to 'watch' Epstein...


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 10, 2019)

the man has a point


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 10, 2019)

Just saw something claiming surveillance cameras "malfunctioned" in JE's cell.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 10, 2019)

Idris2002 said:


> Just saw something claiming surveillance cameras "malfunctioned" in JE's cell.



Something eh? Sounds verifiable


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 10, 2019)

Johnny Vodka said:


> Come on, you've got POTUS, who has been taped talking about grabbing women by the pussy.  Nothing too far fetched here.  It's certainly a possibility.


The one person who I wouldn't suspect of involvement in Epstein's death is Trump since he would be bragging about it on Twitter by now


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 10, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Something eh? Sounds verifiable



Well, this is the original tweet I saw:



A further look at that account shows that this Coudrey gobshite is a GOP Seth Rich truther, so take that one _cum grano salis.  _

I will say that when Billy Wright was shot dead in the maze prison, the CCTV cameras, which had only recently been installed, suffered a surprising failure then too.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 10, 2019)

Idris2002 said:


> Just saw something claiming surveillance cameras "malfunctioned" in JE's cell.


Where's Spymaster and his picture of Jimmy Hill?


----------



## existentialist (Aug 10, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Oh fuck this is never gonna end now.


It was the Illuminati wot dun it. He was on the verge of spilling the beans about the New World Order that, until now, only loonies in pubs and half of YouTube knew about  *taps nose*


----------



## existentialist (Aug 10, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Something eh? Sounds verifiable


It is remarkable how often law enforcement camera tech seems to fail, TBF...


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 10, 2019)

Idris2002 said:


> Just saw something claiming surveillance cameras "malfunctioned" in JE's cell.


Seems legit


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 10, 2019)

Whilst Epstein was clearly an unpleasant cunt, he never struck me as a stupid one, hopefully as we type somewhere one or more other people he trusted are opening the envelopes he gave them in the event of his unexplained death.


----------



## tim (Aug 10, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Where's Spymaster and his picture of Jimmy Hill?










If they'd kept 'em peeled, this would never have happened


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 10, 2019)

I don't know who this Richard Nixon is, but he seems to me to have the clear, level-headed thinking that America needs.

Yes, Nixon's the one! NIXON 2020


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 10, 2019)

Here's a good one - some Trump admin person has claimed that the "suicide" was the work of HILLARY:

Trump Official Implies Hillary Clinton Had Jeffrey Epstein Killed Minutes After News Breaks


----------



## Ming (Aug 10, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> I kind of thought the whole point of suicide watch was that you intervened to stop it not just sit there and watch them actually do it.
> The world has lost nothing in the death of Jeffrey Epstein. I've always laughed at conspiracy theories but this smells worse  than an expired curry.


I'm an RPN and i've nursed loads of suicidal people on locked wards. Don't know how it is in prison but on wards we put people on 'observations' which differ in intensity depending on the assessed level of risk. These vary from hourly (lowest level check) through 30 minute, 15 minute, etc. If someone is high risk (recent serious attempt using a violent method) then you use a 'one to one'. One person assigned to the patient (sometimes line of sight, sometimes arms length). You can even go up to a two to one, etc. If someone is very high risk we put them in a seclusion room (basically a locked bare room with a mattress and security blanket which can't be used as a ligature and a security camera and they're in PJ's only). Also if he was on suicide watch his cell should have been ligature point audited (so nothing to attach a ligature to). If the camera was on the fritz he should have been put on a one to one as the stress that may have produced the attempt on the 25th July would not have gone away. If they were seriously trying to keep him alive for trial and further confessions/revelations they could have is the point i'm making (assuming it was suicide and not murder). As this was a high profile case pressure would have been put on corrections to do their jobs. But as you say...smells like an expired curry.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 10, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> Whilst Epstein was clearly an unpleasant cunt, he never struck me as a stupid one, hopefully as we type somewhere one or more other people he trusted are opening the envelopes he gave them in the event of his unexplained death.



But anyone he trusted is probably also a nonce or at the very least corrupt as fuck. If anyone's received anything it's blackmail/leverage material at best and won't see the light of day.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Aug 10, 2019)

Idris2002 said:


> Here's a good one - some Trump admin person has claimed that the "suicide" was the work of HILLARY:
> 
> Trump Official Implies Hillary Clinton Had Jeffrey Epstein Killed Minutes After News Breaks


For a very litigious country some people do seem to say what they like.


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 10, 2019)

It gets better - Anne Coulter is now questioning if he's dead at all.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 10, 2019)

Idris2002 said:


> Well, that's nice.



So, what you're saying here, is that it's probable that all of Epstein's properties will spontaneously combust in the next couple of days?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 10, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> I kind of thought the whole point of suicide watch was that you intervened to stop it not just sit there and watch them actually do it.
> The world has lost nothing in the death of Jeffrey Epstein. I've always laughed at conspiracy theories but this smells worse  than an expired curry.



"Suicide watch" doesn't mean "constant observation", it means checking the person every x amount of minutes through their cell's spyhole.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 10, 2019)

Idris2002 said:


> Here's a good one - some Trump admin person has claimed that the "suicide" was the work of HILLARY:
> 
> Trump Official Implies Hillary Clinton Had Jeffrey Epstein Killed Minutes After News Breaks



Or "Killary", as they often call her.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 10, 2019)

My money is on the duke of edinburgh who has form for this sort of thing


----------



## brogdale (Aug 10, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> My money is on the duke of edinburgh who has form for this sort of thing


White car spotted?
Dancing jooos?


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 10, 2019)

Say what you like about it, its still slightly more believable than the spy who was supposed to have zipped himself into the sports bag and suffocated. By a whisker maybe.


----------



## MrSki (Aug 10, 2019)




----------



## tim (Aug 10, 2019)

S☼I said:


> For a very litigious country some people do seem to say what they like.



It was a joke. .


And it's easier to sue for libel successfully in the UK  than in the USA


----------



## tim (Aug 10, 2019)

brogdale said:


> White car spotted?
> Dancing jooos?



Yes, the puppets of the Dalai Lamma


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 10, 2019)

Turned out nice again


----------



## Cloo (Aug 10, 2019)

Now I am not a conspiratorial sort at all but it seems rather remarkable to me that they were unable to keep Epstein from killing himself/'killing himself' when he'd already attempted, and given the great efforts made to stop even the most ordinary prisoners from doing so.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 10, 2019)

Cloo said:


> Now I am not a conspiratorial sort at all but it seems rather remarkable to me that they were unable to keep Epstein from killing himself/'killing himself' when he'd already attempted, and given the great efforts made to stop even the most ordinary prisoners from doing so.


I am also not a conspiratorial sort, but I am really struggling with the notion that someone like Epstein, the multi-billionaire mover-and-shaker, adventurer, user, abuser, well-connected rebel and maverick, was really the suicide-in-his-cell type. Something really doesn't fit.


----------



## bluescreen (Aug 10, 2019)

existentialist said:


> I am also not a conspiratorial sort, but I am really struggling with the notion that someone like Epstein, the multi-billionaire mover-and-shaker, adventurer, user, abuser, well-connected rebel and maverick, was really the suicide-in-his-cell type. Something really doesn't fit.


I dunno. If deprived of his usual chemical needs he might be. He might have had something to say after his first 'attempt' if anyone had asked him. Presumably the people who assessed his mental condition afterwards and decided he didn't need to be on suicide watch after all had asked him and taken a view.

But how very convenient for so many people.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 10, 2019)

He knew that he was never seeing the outside of a nick again. Hacks (screws in the US) have a far more ambivalent attitude towards their prisoners, mainly cos so many will die behind bars. In the UK even the very worst of the worst who are given whole life are allowed to die in a regular hospital, not in the US, and you certainly don’t need to be worst of the worst to get whole life over there.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 10, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> He knew that he was never seeing the outside of a nick again. Hacks (screws in the US) have a far more ambivalent attitude towards their prisoners, mainly cos so many will die deigns bars. In the UK even the very worst of the worst who are given whole life are allowed to die in a regular hospital, not in the US, and you certainly don’t need to be worst of the worst to get whole life over there.


Rational analyses never quite cover the whole thing, though. It is very rarely the case that a decision to attempt suicide is made on that kind of rational basis - in 99.9% of cases, it's driven by a sense of hopelessness or despair. I'm struggling to square that idea with the kind of person Epstein was. Everything, from that, to the idea that it was possible for such a high-profile and significant prisoner to complete a suicide undetected until it was conveniently too late, stinks of "agenda". I could well be wrong - I don't know him, or the details of the setup - but something just pans out a little too conveniently.

And, while we might rejoice that this time it's the scumbag Epstein, we need to bear in mind that the next "unfortunate accident" could happen to someone with the lowdown on Trump, or one of his allies, successors, or co-conspirators.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 10, 2019)

This evening's 'reaction' from Buckingham Palace:



Revealing that the 'denial' does not rebut the Sjoberg allegation of sexual assault or the allegation of "impropriety" with the, then 17 year old, Giuffre.


----------



## bluescreen (Aug 10, 2019)

"underage minors"  Is that just tautology or is it protesting too much?

ETA: Of course a minor might still be above the age of consent in some jurisdictions, eg the UK. Noted that the age of consent is 17 in NY.


----------



## Boris Sprinkler (Aug 10, 2019)

Can we say nonce?


----------



## brogdale (Aug 10, 2019)

Boris Sprinkler said:


> Can we say nonce?



A cursory twitter search would suggest so...


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 10, 2019)

existentialist said:


> Rational analyses never quite cover the whole thing, though. It is very rarely the case that a decision to attempt suicide is made on that kind of rational basis - in 99.9% of cases, it's driven by a sense of hopelessness or despair.



I have no figures, but with the predilection of US courts to dish out 100+ years at the drop of a hat, I would imagine that he knew that he was fucked and couldn’t face it. That is hopelessness and despair. Christ knows what kind of mental state you need to do what he did financially and with his sick personal life. All the more to keep a close eye on all rich folk.


----------



## fucthest8 (Aug 10, 2019)

Ming said:


> I'm an RPN and i've nursed loads of suicidal people on locked wards. Don't know how it is in prison but on wards we put people on 'observations' which differ in intensity depending on the assessed level of risk. These vary from hourly (lowest level check) through 30 minute, 15 minute, etc. If someone is high risk (recent serious attempt using a violent method) then you use a 'one to one'. One person assigned to the patient (sometimes line of sight, sometimes arms length). You can even go up to a two to one, etc. If someone is very high risk we put them in a seclusion room (basically a locked bare room with a mattress and security blanket which can't be used as a ligature and a security camera and they're in PJ's only). Also if he was on suicide watch his cell should have been ligature point audited (so nothing to attach a ligature to). If the camera was on the fritz he should have been put on a one to one as the stress that may have produced the attempt on the 25th July would not have gone away. If they were seriously trying to keep him alive for trial and further confessions/revelations they could have is the point i'm making (assuming it was suicide and not murder). As this was a high profile case pressure would have been put on corrections to do their jobs. But as you say...smells like an expired curry.



Oh you and your process and procedure and your common sense. Has no place here. The man clearly strangled himself to death with his own bare hands, good riddance to bad rubbish.

Look! A squirrel!


----------



## Boris Sprinkler (Aug 10, 2019)

Look at this way. He invested money in cryogenics, because he's scared of what awaits him.  Waste of money. Proper nonce kills himself, wakes up in hell.


----------



## 8ball (Aug 10, 2019)

Probably been said before, but a colleague in the US said a few days ago that the Prince Andrew thing is all over the media there. I’d barely seen a peep at that point.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 10, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> "underage minors"  Is that just tautology or is it protesting too much?
> 
> ETA: Of course a minor might still be above the age of consent in some jurisdictions, eg the UK. Noted that the age of consent is 17 in NY.


Yes, denial does not include "impropriety" (in the UK) with anyone aged 17.


----------



## Ming (Aug 10, 2019)

fucthest8 said:


> Oh you and your process and procedure and your common sense. Has no place here. The man clearly strangled himself to death with his own bare hands, good riddance to bad rubbish.
> 
> Look! A squirrel!


Well to be fair no one mentioned the squirrel.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 10, 2019)

Meanwhile....Trump is retweeting stuff like this...


----------



## Steel Icarus (Aug 10, 2019)

Maybe I'm a naive idealist or some shit but I've always imagined people in such incredibly lofty positions should display professionalism, dignity and manners. If I, nobody from nowhere, would get the sack for posting something like that (and I likely would) then why the fuck won't Trump?


----------



## Boris Sprinkler (Aug 10, 2019)

to be fair, last time i was in cells i would have found it difficult to top myself. But then i'm not a financial "genius".

edit: for clarification; normal police cells. Not on suicide watch.


----------



## Boris Sprinkler (Aug 10, 2019)

And the point the finger thing is obvious...


----------



## Dogsauce (Aug 10, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> I dunno. If deprived of his usual chemical needs he might be. He might have had something to say after his first 'attempt' if anyone had asked him. Presumably the people who assessed his mental condition afterwards and decided he didn't need to be on suicide watch after all had asked him and taken a view.
> 
> But how very convenient for so many people.



Not sure how ‘convenient’ this is when his death will dominate the headlines for a while and consequently amplify the accusations against him and associates. It’ll feed every conspiracy going. More attention is drawn to the wrong’uns by this happening really, I think they’d have preferred something quieter.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 11, 2019)

Whatever happened around the 'suicide' I do hope he spent the last few weeks with a mounting sense of dread about the turn his life has taken. But yeah, convenient is the right word. Doesn't mean anyone took the high risk strategy of doing him in, maybe they just left a known _suicide _risk with minimal checks.


----------



## agricola (Aug 11, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> Not sure how ‘convenient’ this is when his death will dominate the headlines for a while and consequently amplify the accusations against him and associates. It’ll feed every conspiracy going. More attention is drawn to the wrong’uns by this happening really, I think they’d have preferred something quieter.



I doubt it; if anything recent history would tend to suggest that being obviously to blame for someone accidentally committing suicide / ingesting polonium / dismembering whilst awaiting a marriage licence / confusing nerve agent with duty free airport perfume is something that the perpetrators are actually aiming for.


----------



## Yossarian (Aug 11, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Meanwhile....Trump is retweeting stuff like this...
> 
> View attachment 180428



"Man who oversees federal Bureau of Prisons blames suspicious death on predecessor from 20 years ago."


----------



## Don Troooomp (Aug 11, 2019)

Andrew will be a happy chappy this morning. The perv snuffing it was a really handy turn of events.
Wonder if any prison guards are going on holiday to 5 star hotels on tropical islands next week.


----------



## bluescreen (Aug 11, 2019)

Some classy tittle-tattle from Andrew O'Hagan:
LRB · Andrew O’Hagan · Short Cuts: Jeffrey Epstein’s Little Black Book


----------



## Gimigimi (Aug 11, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> Not sure how ‘convenient’ this is when his death will dominate the headlines for a while and consequently amplify the accusations against him and associates. It’ll feed every conspiracy going. More attention is drawn to the wrong’uns by this happening really, I think they’d have preferred something quieter.



This strikes me as a method of last resort.  The extent and gravity of the crime perhaps necessitates it - that is, the public can easily understand what's gone on here.  There's no real way to spin this, no amount of PR flak that can stop a clear statement of involvement with underage prostitution.  If this were a financial crime, where millions of people had been screwed out of their livelihoods, the parties implicated could always blanket the media with garbage about how careful the companies will be next time, what a mistake they've made, etc, and rely on generalized ignorance about the nuances of economics - see Wells Fargo for a basic example.  I once made a dollar fifty filling out a survey asking me repeated questions about what I knew about 'negative coverage' of Wells Fargo in the media.  They were paying a survey company to see what the public knew, so they knew how much to spin, and what they should be spinning.  With Epstein, though, it's not really possible to bullshit your way out of it if he decides to squeal.  Everyone knows what underage sex is - there's no ambiguity and no escape hatch.  That means he has to die.  Even if it fuels speculation, it will only stay speculation and it can always be called a "conspiracy theory".  It'll always just be one of those "controversial" things, where anyone involved can always weasel out with "well, we don't have any hard proof".

That's the pessimistic outlook, of course.  The future has yet to be written, and perhaps other testimony can bring down some of the people involved - but with Epstein himself gone, the cases will be a lot harder compared to what they would have been with his cooperation.  Perhaps impossible.

Obviously all of this is just speculation, and I'm not even that well-read on the case, and barely know anything about my own legal system.  But this right here is the most obviously corrupt thing I believe I've ever seen in the USA in my lifetime in terms of the extent and ... diversity? of the people involved.  There's so many people linked to Epstein it boggles the mind, and I really thought my mind was kind of un-bogglable these days.  I guess it's just the result of the sexual nature of the case - probably an artifact of power in general, without a political or financial motive, so it affects a larger number of people?


----------



## Poi E (Aug 11, 2019)

Gimigimi, are you in the US?


----------



## bluescreen (Aug 11, 2019)

Snippage 





Gimigimi said:


> Obviously all of this is just speculation, and I'm not even that well-read on the case, and barely know anything about my own legal system.  But this right here is the most obviously corrupt thing I believe I've ever seen in the USA in my lifetime in terms of the extent and ... diversity? of the people involved.  There's so many people linked to Epstein it boggles the mind, and I really thought my mind was kind of un-bogglable these days.  I guess it's just the result of the sexual nature of the case - probably an artifact of power in general, without a political or financial motive, so it affects a larger number of people?


Best place to read up is the Miami Herald. Julie K Brown has done sterling work on digging around to get the case this far. This article has links to the previous long reports: https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/article233742972.html


----------



## Gimigimi (Aug 11, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Gimigimi, are you in the US?


Sure am.  Have not yet physically left the borders of my, uh, homeland even once, sad to say.


----------



## Poi E (Aug 11, 2019)

Plenty to see in North America first.


----------



## Badgers (Aug 12, 2019)

Good headline / picture placement


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 12, 2019)

fucthest8 said:


> Oh you and your process and procedure and your common sense. Has no place here. The man clearly strangled himself to death with his own bare hands, good riddance to bad rubbish.
> 
> Look! A squirrel!



Yep, blates a stranglewank gone wrong.


----------



## Cid (Aug 12, 2019)

Ming said:


> I'm an RPN and i've nursed loads of suicidal people on locked wards. Don't know how it is in prison but on wards we put people on 'observations' which differ in intensity depending on the assessed level of risk. These vary from hourly (lowest level check) through 30 minute, 15 minute, etc. If someone is high risk (recent serious attempt using a violent method) then you use a 'one to one'. One person assigned to the patient (sometimes line of sight, sometimes arms length). You can even go up to a two to one, etc. If someone is very high risk we put them in a seclusion room (basically a locked bare room with a mattress and security blanket which can't be used as a ligature and a security camera and they're in PJ's only). Also if he was on suicide watch his cell should have been ligature point audited (so nothing to attach a ligature to). If the camera was on the fritz he should have been put on a one to one as the stress that may have produced the attempt on the 25th July would not have gone away. If they were seriously trying to keep him alive for trial and further confessions/revelations they could have is the point i'm making (assuming it was suicide and not murder). As this was a high profile case pressure would have been put on corrections to do their jobs. But as you say...smells like an expired curry.



Yeah, but your patients probably don’t hold a lot of cards in a major criminal investigation with access to the best lawyers money can buy. A bit of bargaining gets him a few privileges, slightly less frequent checks etc. Doesn’t take a lot.

I mean clearly there are other possibilities, but 99 times in 100 incompetence over conspiracy.


----------



## strung out (Aug 12, 2019)

Enjoyed the front page of the Metro this morning


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 12, 2019)

“Duke’s paedo friend”


----------



## discokermit (Aug 12, 2019)

Gimigimi said:


> without a political or financial motive


there are political and financial motives aplenty in this case. It's riddled with them.


----------



## andysays (Aug 12, 2019)

Cid said:


> Yeah, but your patients probably don’t hold a lot of cards in a major criminal investigation with access to the best lawyers money can buy. A bit of bargaining gets him a few privileges, slightly less frequent checks etc. Doesn’t take a lot.
> 
> I mean clearly there are other possibilities, but 99 times in 100 incompetence over conspiracy.


Maybe I'm just being wise after the event but less frequent checks when you're on suicide watch doesn't sound like much of a privilege to me...


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Aug 12, 2019)

Old Prince Andrew is lucky fearless campaigner Yaxley-Lennon is banged up isn't he. He wouldn't be standing for that sort of thing, he'd be straight round there.


----------



## 8ball (Aug 12, 2019)

strung out said:


> Enjoyed the front page of the Metro this morning
> 
> View attachment 180628



Wow - that's actually real?


----------



## Wilf (Aug 12, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> “Duke’s paedo friend”


Wonder if he'll be going to the funeral? Regardless, I think we should all respect his privacy at this difficult time.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 12, 2019)

8ball said:


> Wow - that's actually real?


yeh this from the bbc


----------



## strung out (Aug 12, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh this from the bbc
> 
> View attachment 180636


I like how the BBC says 'former friend'. It's only former because the cunt got caught and is now dead, otherwise Andy would still be chumming up with the convicted paedo.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 12, 2019)

strung out said:


> I like how the BBC says 'former friend'. It's only former because the cunt got caught and is now dead, otherwise Andy would still be chumming up with the convicted paedo.


There's probably royal etiquette on this:

One nonce conviction: remain friends, Christmas cards and the rest - but no paintballing or Nandos.

Two nonce convictions: quiet curry every month, but no sleepovers.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 12, 2019)

As an aside, why does the Queen go to church? She's head of the Church of England, chosen by God to rules us plebs. So if she's so fucking in with the Big Man, why the need to go and sing a few hymns and listen to some lesser God rep drone on every week?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 12, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> As an aside, why does the Queen go to church? She's head of the Church of England, chosen by God to rules us plebs. So if she's so fucking in with the Big Man, why the need to go and sing a few hymns and listed to some lesser God rep drone on every week?


she is the supreme governor of the church of england, not its head. i'm sure the difference is important


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 12, 2019)

Wilf said:


> There's probably royal etiquette on this:
> 
> One nonce conviction: remain friends, Christmas cards and the rest - but no paintballing or Nandos.
> 
> Two nonce convictions: quiet curry every month, but no sleepovers.


what i want to know is, did beatrice and eugenie ever get to meet the dead man?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 12, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> she is the supreme governor of the church of england, not its head. i'm sure the difference is important



Every day's a school day 

So she's some kind of Lenny Mclean of the religious world?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 12, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Every day's a school day
> 
> So she's some kind of Lenny Mclean of the religious world?


she's handy with her fists, the queen, but not that handy


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 12, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> she's handy with her fists, the queen, but not that handy



Next time I'm in the States and am asked why we love our Queen so much I'm gonna reply, "She's a bit tasty on the cobbles."


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 12, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Next time I'm in the States and am asked why we love our Queen so much I'm gonna reply, "She's a bit tasty on the cobbles."


'we remember when she blacked winston churchill's eye in june '53, when she demonstrated his services as pm were no longer needed'


----------



## JuanTwoThree (Aug 12, 2019)

Of course in Scotland she's a nobody. The capo there is the Moderator of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland.






I reckon she could deck him. Easily.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 12, 2019)

JuanTwoThree said:


> Of course in Scotland she's a nobody. The capo there is the Moderator of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


you can see she already has, he's still wearing his hospital smock and thanking god she didn't kick him to death


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 12, 2019)

discokermit said:


> there are political and financial motives aplenty in this case. It's riddled with them.


Follow the. . . what was it again?


----------



## gosub (Aug 12, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh this from the bbc
> 
> View attachment 180636



Good of him to wear a black tie.  Seems to be taking the loss of a fomer 'friend' quite well.


----------



## Sue (Aug 12, 2019)

JuanTwoThree said:


> Of course in Scotland she's a nobody. The capo there is the Moderator of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


...who is, of course, elected and changes annually.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 12, 2019)

gosub said:


> Good of him to wear a black tie.  Seems to be taking the loss of a fomer 'friend' quite well.


sometimes it's so difficult to tell laughter from tears


----------



## TopCat (Aug 12, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Every day's a school day
> 
> So she's some kind of Lenny Mclean of the religious world?


Thank you for this.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Aug 12, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> she's handy with her fists, the queen, but not that handy



Queensbury Rules.


----------



## bluescreen (Aug 12, 2019)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Queensbury Rules.


With emphasis on the 'bury'


----------



## Combustible (Aug 12, 2019)

Cid said:


> Yeah, but your patients probably don’t hold a lot of cards in a major criminal investigation with access to the best lawyers money can buy. A bit of bargaining gets him a few privileges, slightly less frequent checks etc. Doesn’t take a lot



He was taken off suicide watch before he died wasn't he. Which is presumably something else money helps with either via bribery or expensive lawyers.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 12, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> As an aside, why does the Queen go to church? She's head of the Church of England, chosen by God to rules us plebs. So if she's so fucking in with the Big Man, why the need to go and sing a few hymns and listen to some lesser God rep drone on every week?


It allows her to intervene at random in the sermon.

 "Blessed are the ..."
- ME!
"it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God..."
- FUCK OFF, THAT'S BOLLOCKS!


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 12, 2019)

Wilf said:


> It allows her to intervene at random in the sermon.
> 
> "Blessed are the ..."
> - ME!
> ...


i think she'd point out to st peter that she is self-evidently not a rich man


----------



## Wilf (Aug 12, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i think she'd point out to st peter that she is self-evidently not a rich man


She's no need to worry, if she goes at the same time as Phil, he'll crash his landrover through the pearly gates.


----------



## Badgers (Aug 12, 2019)

What has Farage said about him?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 12, 2019)

Badgers said:


> What has Farage said about him?


he dares say nothing about the duke of edinburgh, the most feared assassination _meister_ in europe


----------



## dylanredefined (Aug 12, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> he dares say nothing about the duke of edinburgh, the most feared assassination _meister_ in europe


The man is a living God.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 12, 2019)

dylanredefined said:


> The man is a living God.


strange you should say that, as there are valleys in peru where the inhabitants, descendants of the incas, whisper that he is quetzlcoatl returned


----------



## dylanredefined (Aug 12, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> strange you should say that, as there are valleys in peru where the inhabitants, descendants of the incas, whisper that he is quetzlcoatl returned


 The Kastom people of Tannu island Vannautu worship him.
 It's a cargo cult.
 I too do strange rituals at the weekends to appease the sky gods. Think the Kastom people have more chance of getting a visit from Phil.  Than us lot getting a helicopter.
Maybe we could blow up a dam.


----------



## JuanTwoThree (Aug 12, 2019)

Namwan bigfella Pilipili ime blang Misis Kwin

Prince Philip in Tok Pisin, from memory.


----------



## gosub (Aug 12, 2019)

Wilf said:


> It allows her to intervene at random in the sermon.
> 
> "Blessed are the ..."
> - ME!
> ...


I don't know , you get some pretty big needles and what's the diameter of a Camel *  about 1cm





Other brands of cigarettes are available


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 12, 2019)

dylanredefined said:


> The Kastom people of Tannu island Vannautu worship him.
> It's a cargo cult.
> I too do strange rituals at the weekends to appease the sky gods. Think the Kastom people have more chance of getting a visit from Phil.  Than us lot getting a helicopter.
> Maybe we could blow up a dam.


A friend of mine - well, she's more like someone I used to know really - did research there. She says the locals believe that Phil is secretly one of them, and is subverting the royal family from within.


----------



## Gimigimi (Aug 12, 2019)

discokermit said:


> there are political and financial motives aplenty in this case. It's riddled with them.



I had to actually go back to see that I had written something that silly. You're right, of course, and I expressed myself really poorly there. What I meant was mostly that I was surprised at the extent of involvement considering the risk. Of course Epstein and his "assistants" were benefiting financially, and maybe there was blackmail or involvement with intelligence agencies or god knows what else. At some point, though, a whole bunch of upper class people seem to have made the decision to get involved in this thing because they wanted to express their power through sexual abuse, and that urge was stronger than their fear of getting caught and potentially losing everything. That surprised me a bit.

Trying to think seriously about this topic is making me kind of ill, though. I should probably stick to making jokes about it.


----------



## discokermit (Aug 12, 2019)

Gimigimi said:


> I had to actually go back to see that I had written something that silly. You're right, of course, and I expressed myself really poorly there. What I meant was mostly that I was surprised at the extent of involvement considering the risk. Of course Epstein and his "assistants" were benefiting financially, and maybe there was blackmail or involvement with intelligence agencies or god knows what else. At some point, though, a whole bunch of upper class people seem to have made the decision to get involved in this thing because they wanted to express their power through sexual abuse, and that urge was stronger than their fear of getting caught and potentially losing everything. That surprised me a bit.
> 
> Trying to think seriously about this topic is making me kind of ill, though. I should probably stick to making jokes about it.


It gave them more power and money. It was an initiation into a club, a ritual that meant they all have something on each other and so can be trusted.
They're all chums, helping each other out, making each other rich, giving each other positions of power.


----------



## Don Troooomp (Aug 13, 2019)

The duke's hazzard has reduced since the perv's death


----------



## Ming (Aug 13, 2019)

One slightly off topic thing. I’ve always had a feeling that the rich live in a world different to most peoples. Including having an expectation that any desires they may have will be met. Including sexual ones. I suppose Jeffery Epstein and his ‘associates’ and customers are an example of this.


----------



## Ming (Aug 13, 2019)

Cid said:


> Yeah, but your patients probably don’t hold a lot of cards in a major criminal investigation with access to the best lawyers money can buy. A bit of bargaining gets him a few privileges, slightly less frequent checks etc. Doesn’t take a lot.
> 
> I mean clearly there are other possibilities, but 99 times in 100 incompetence over conspiracy.


Well they took him off suicide watch, removed his cell mate and then the security camera stopped working. In probably the highest profile case in the country. In my opinion he was allowed to commit suicide.
ETA: They also stopped doing the Q30 minute obs that were ordered. And this was less than a week after a serious suicide attempt using a violent method (indicating serious intent). I sometimes pull shifts at the local forensics unit Colony Farm (think Ashworth, Rampton and Broadmoor) which isn't a million miles away from corrections. This would never have been allowed to happen. Especially with such a high profile case. The managers should've have had this at the top of their agenda. It's fishy as fuck.


----------



## bluescreen (Aug 13, 2019)

Ming said:


> One slightly off topic thing. I’ve always had a feeling that the rich live in a world different to most peoples. Including having an expectation that any desires they may have will be met. Including sexual ones. I suppose Jeffery Epstein and his ‘associates’ and customers are an example of this.


Do you think he bought himself the opportunity to commit suicide? From what little I know, it seems the simplest explanation. Probably suited a lot of people all round, including those paid to turn a blind eye.


----------



## Ming (Aug 13, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> Do you think he bought himself the opportunity to commit suicide? From what little I know, it seems the simplest explanation. Probably suited a lot of people all round, including those paid to turn a blind eye.


You can always speculate.


----------



## Poi E (Aug 13, 2019)

dylanredefined said:


> The Kastom people of Tannu island Vannautu worship him.
> It's a cargo cult.
> I too do strange rituals at the weekends to appease the sky gods. Think the Kastom people have more chance of getting a visit from Phil.  Than us lot getting a helicopter.
> Maybe we could blow up a dam.



Tanna, Vanuatu.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 13, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> Do you think he bought himself the opportunity to commit suicide? From what little I know, it seems the simplest explanation. Probably suited a lot of people all round, including those paid to turn a blind eye.



The only theory that can be ruled out at this point is that nothing dodgy at all happened in regards to Epstein's death. That sort of thing is always a field day for conspironauts.


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 13, 2019)

I have no idea if this is for real (I suspect not):


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 13, 2019)

Idris2002 said:


> I have no idea if this is for real (I suspect not):


Is it really a screen shot of the NYT, or doctored? And if real, is it a sketch or humorous satirical piece, or an actual quote of a witness they verify as reliable?


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 13, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Is it really a screen shot of the NYT, or doctored? And if real, is it a sketch or humorous satirical piece, or an actual quote of a witness they verify as reliable?


It is a humorous parody. Though these days you'd be forgiven if you couldn't immediately tell.


----------



## 8ball (Aug 13, 2019)

Idris2002 said:


> It is a humorous parody. Though these days you'd be forgiven if you couldn't immediately tell.



Quite a time to be alive.


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 13, 2019)

8ball said:


> Quite a time to be alive.


Just not in a good way.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 13, 2019)

8ball said:


> Quite a time to be alive.



- didn’t say Epstein.


----------



## Cid (Aug 14, 2019)

Ming said:


> Well they took him off suicide watch, removed his cell mate and then the security camera stopped working. In probably the highest profile case in the country. In my opinion he was allowed to commit suicide.
> ETA: They also stopped doing the Q30 minute obs that were ordered. And this was less than a week after a serious suicide attempt using a violent method (indicating serious intent). I sometimes pull shifts at the local forensics unit Colony Farm (think Ashworth, Rampton and Broadmoor) which isn't a million miles away from corrections. This would never have been allowed to happen. Especially with such a high profile case. The managers should've have had this at the top of their agenda. It's fishy as fuck.



Yeah, but knowing the US justice system, these are going to be low paid, overworked failed police officers. I mean I fully grant that this looks dodgy as fuck, but incompetence over conspiracy nearly every time.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Aug 14, 2019)

He knew he was facing serious time perhaps never to be released. This is a guy who owns an island who is contemplating his future in a cell in some shit hole. Not beyond the realms of possibility that he did himself in and incompetence allowed it to happen.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Aug 14, 2019)

Plus, if the establishment wanted to bump anyone off, surely it would be his accusers?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 14, 2019)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Plus, if the establishment wanted to bump anyone off, surely it would be his accusers?



Too many.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Aug 14, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Too many.



Wasn’t there just one to begin with? She has an ‘accident’, the message goes out to the rest. Plus, I don’t see how getting rid of him stops anything either. The accusations didn’t die with him.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 14, 2019)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Wasn’t there just one to begin with? She has an ‘accident’, the message goes out to the rest. Plus, I don’t see how getting rid of him stops anything either. The accusations didn’t die with him.


But at the very least, his trial dies with him. I've no idea who else is being investigated or might be charged, but he himself cannot spill the beans on others in the courtroom - or threaten to do so in increasing desperation to somehow beat this. Facing the rest of his life in jail, he had precious little motive to keep quiet.


----------



## kenny g (Aug 14, 2019)

A dead perp is obviously better for the other guilties than a trial.


----------



## JimW (Aug 15, 2019)

Just read in the Sydney Morning herald that the autopsy revealed broken neck bones that might result from hanging in an older person but usually consistent with strangulation.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 15, 2019)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Wasn’t there just one to begin with? She has an ‘accident’, the message goes out to the rest. Plus, I don’t see how getting rid of him stops anything either. The accusations didn’t die with him.


Esp if as has been reported he kept a detailed diary of who his guests were and what they got up to


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 15, 2019)

JimW said:


> Just read in the Sydney Morning herald that the autopsy revealed broken neck bones that might result from hanging in an older person but usually consistent with strangulation.


The hyoid bone. The last case I remember involving that bone, the victim was a female Spartacist League member in early '90s Moscow.


----------



## chandlerp (Aug 15, 2019)

Saw a report this morning that Prince Andrew has "retired" due to stress.  hahaha, fucking stress.


----------



## strung out (Aug 15, 2019)

chandlerp said:


> Saw a report this morning that Prince Andrew has "retired" due to stress.  hahaha, fucking stress.


Yeah, his paedo mate died


----------



## Patteran (Aug 15, 2019)

Magnus McGinty said:


> He knew he was facing serious time perhaps never to be released. This is a guy who owns an island who is contemplating his future in a cell in some shit hole. Not beyond the realms of possibility that he did himself in and incompetence allowed it to happen.



I dunno. Suicide tends to need hopelessness, helplessness or shame - not common reactions among the sociopathic billionaire class. For people like him, there's always a way out, always a second, third, fourth, fortieth chance. Deals to be done, levers to be pulled. Suicide seems premature, even without the massive eyebrow raise of a prison (deemed secure enough to house the likes of El Chapo) taking its eyes off its most vulnerable prisoner while its manager is under massive global scrutiny. The whole thing is obscure as candles in a hall of mirrors, & probably always will be, but accepting the official line feels too easy to me.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 15, 2019)

strung out said:


> Yeah, his paedo mate died
> 
> View attachment 180953


they're all at it now

Fergie takes Andrew on holiday after death of paedophile billionaire friend


----------



## JimW (Aug 15, 2019)

Clearly some evidence in Sotogrande needs disposal.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 15, 2019)

From today's popbitch:


> Old Jokes Home
> Q/ What do you get if you cross Bill Clinton and Donald Trump?
> A/ Found in your cell, unresponsive


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 15, 2019)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Plus, if the establishment wanted to bump anyone off, surely it would be his accusers?


If he has been bumped off and personally I reckoned the odds are in favour not against, it doesn't mean a conspiracy by the establishment whatever that is.
All of the people he could likely finger are rich and powerful and quite possibly some are involved in organised crime, it's just takes ONE of them to decide that it's better for Epstein to be dead rather than alive.  If there is a high turnover of disinterested and poorly trained agency staff getting someone in there to break his neck is probably all too easy.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 15, 2019)

Does this mean the hanged doll was part of the photo-montage or as well as?



> Epstein’s house on East 71st Street, which was said to be the biggest of its kind in the city, was as creepy as its owner. With a stone satyr over the fifteen-foot front door and forty rooms over seven floors, the decor was of the Gothic Quagmire school: according to the FBI agents who raided it at the beginning of July, it contains among other weirdnesses a photo-montage of Epstein standing in a prison surrounded by warders and barbed wire, and a life-sized doll hanging from a chandelier


----------



## killer b (Aug 15, 2019)

as well as, i'd say.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Aug 15, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> If he has been bumped off and personally I reckoned the odds are in favour not against, it doesn't mean a conspiracy by the establishment whatever that is.
> All of the people he could likely finger are rich and powerful and quite possibly some are involved in organised crime, it's just takes ONE of them to decide that it's better for Epstein to be dead rather than alive.  If there is a high turnover of disinterested and poorly trained agency staff getting someone in there to break his neck is probably all too easy.



Those who wanted rid of him had their work cut out then. I mean you need to organise the failure of the cameras and the ineptness of the guards and have someone in place to do the deed.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 15, 2019)

Patteran said:


> I dunno. Suicide tends to need hopelessness, helplessness or shame - not common reactions among the sociopathic billionaire class. For people like him, there's always a way out, always a second, third, fourth, fortieth chance. Deals to be done, levers to be pulled. Suicide seems premature, even without the massive eyebrow raise of a prison (deemed secure enough to house the likes of El Chapo) taking its eyes off its most vulnerable prisoner while its manager is under massive global scrutiny. The whole thing is obscure as candles in a hall of mirrors, & probably always will be, but accepting the official line feels too easy to me.



When he was sent down before he was allowed out every day to go to work. So not real time.

This time he was denied bail, he wasn’t stupid, he knew that he was never getting out. Even billionaire sociopaths know when the game’s up. Even under fairly extreme suicide watch people can still off themselves. Why he was not on watch is a question that needs answering, but Occam’s razor says he checked out of his own accord, at the second attempt.


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 15, 2019)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Those who wanted rid of him had their work cut out then. I mean you need to organise the failure of the cameras and the ineptness of the guards and have someone in place to do the deed.


I suspect that is not as difficult as you might think, especially given he has been in there for a few weeks and there has been the chance to make enquiries.
And money lots of money makes all sorts of things possible.
How's your wife's medical bills Bert, still crippingly expensive? Here's $50K all you have to do is turn the camera's off, leave the fire door on the latch and make yourself scarce for half an hour. Never mind the big guy in the ill-fitting uniform nothing to see here.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Aug 15, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> I suspect that is not as difficult as you might think, especially given he has been in there for a few weeks and there has been the chance to make enquiries.
> And money lots of money makes all sorts of things possible.
> How's your wife's medical bills Bert, still crippingly expensive? Here's $50K all you have to do is turn the camera's off, leave the fire door on the latch and make yourself scarce for half an hour. Never mind the big guy in the ill-fitting uniform nothing to see here.



I’m not saying it’s impossible, but murder happening in a secure cell is magnitudes worse than ineptness even. I’m thinking about how security services could overtake my job for instance, without me knowing about it. And it’s far less strict than who enters and leaves a prison.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 15, 2019)

Jeepers. We all know how incompetent the police are. When the fail at the piggery they become screws. 

Now in the US the state police make our PCSO’s look like Mossad agents, just imagine what’s whirring away in the head of a hack.


----------



## Patteran (Aug 15, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> When he was sent down before he was allowed out every day to go to work. So not real time.
> 
> This time he was denied bail, he wasn’t stupid, he knew that he was never getting out. Even billionaire sociopaths know when the game’s up. Even under fairly extreme suicide watch people can still off themselves. Why he was not on watch is a question that needs answering, but Occam’s razor says he checked out of his own accord, at the second attempt.



Alternative to Occam's Razor - whatever QAnon says is true is actually false - & they're pushing the 'suicide' line. 

If it was after sentencing, on his way to the big house, I'd agree - the game was up. And we're not privy to conversations he's had with his brief etc - maybe he was told that the money was gone & no one was answering the phones. But yep, a big question about being taken off suicide watch, which apparently means being moved to a cell without cameras.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 15, 2019)

Patteran said:


> Alternative to Occam's Razor - whatever QAnon says is true is actually false - & they're pushing the 'suicide' line.
> 
> If it was after sentencing, on his way to the big house, I'd agree - the game was up. And we're not privy to conversations he's had with his brief etc - maybe he was told that the money was gone & no one was answering the phones. But yep, a big question about being taken off suicide watch, which apparently means being moved to a cell without cameras.



In the American ‘justice’ system, once you are nicked you get convicted. How bad that conviction is depends on how many others you are prepared to grass. But when it starts with no bail and the most secure facility in the eastern USA you know what the future has in store.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 16, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> When he was sent down before he was allowed out every day to go to work. So not real time.
> 
> This time he was denied bail, he wasn’t stupid, he knew that he was never getting out. Even billionaire sociopaths know when the game’s up. Even under fairly extreme suicide watch people can still off themselves. Why he was not on watch is a question that needs answering, but Occam’s razor says he checked out of his own accord, at the second attempt.


Does it? There are a bunch of massively powerful people (some of the most powerful in the world) who are very relieved that he is now dead. It is an extremely convenient death for them. Maybe it was suicide, we don't know. But I see no reason to jump to a conclusion via Occam's razor that it was.


----------



## 8ball (Aug 16, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Maybe it was suicide...



My exact opinion also.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Aug 16, 2019)

So what is the point of Occam’s razor if it should only be used selectively?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 16, 2019)

Magnus McGinty said:


> So what is the point of Occam’s razor if it should only be used selectively?


That wasn't my point here. You could just as easily say that Occam's razor says he was bumped off, given the power of those he posed a threat to while alive.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Aug 16, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> That wasn't my point here. You could just as easily say that Occam's razor says he was bumped off, given the power of those he posed a threat to while alive.



That adds an assumption.


----------



## 8ball (Aug 16, 2019)

Magnus McGinty said:


> So what is the point of Occam’s razor if it should only be used selectively?



You get to an answer that is usually right, a lot quicker.
You also get to the wrong answer quicker sometimes, which is a very popular strategy.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 16, 2019)

Magnus McGinty said:


> That adds an assumption.


What assumption, that he posed a threat to some very powerful people? If so, is that a reasonable assumption? If you think it is, then it ought to be factored in - it forms part of the available information on which the decision is being made. Occam's razor doesn't mean 'selectively ignore anything you can't prove'.

He either killed himself or was killed. Either of these seems plausible to me. The convenience of the death puts doubt in my mind about any official story about it. So there's no compelling reason to plump for one over the other at the moment, probably never will be. Occam's razor doesn't really help us here.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Aug 16, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> What assumption, that he posed a threat to some very powerful people? If so, is that a reasonable assumption? If you think it is, then it ought to be factored in - it forms part of the available information on which the decision is being made. Occam's razor doesn't mean 'selectively ignore anything you can't prove'.



I thought it weighs up theories based on the amount of assumptions they contain (reasonable or otherwise).
If he’s been done then the security services will have to have done it. They would be able to do that. But not easy to do inside a secure facility with guards on duty.


----------



## 8ball (Aug 16, 2019)

Magnus McGinty said:


> I thought it weighs up theories based on the amount of assumptions they contain (reasonable or otherwise).



IIrc, then speaking literally, it's more to do with starting with what you know and then _not adding_ assumptions / propositions unless absolutely necessary.  The story that covers the facts with the fewest added entities is usually (but not always) correct.

It works best for fairly ordinary stories with few exceptional factors.

Scientists often use it as a way of generating hypotheses that they can then attempt to demolish with further experiments.  If Occam's razor was infallible we wouldn't need scientists.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Aug 16, 2019)

I don’t think it’s unlikely that he was murdered, I think it would be difficult to do without including others in the plot such as guards etc.


----------



## mystic pyjamas (Aug 16, 2019)

Occam’s razor is if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck and waddles like a duck then it is a fucking duck. 
Also a CIA motto.


----------



## Patteran (Aug 16, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> In the American ‘justice’ system, once you are nicked you get convicted. How bad that conviction is depends on how many others you are prepared to grass. But when it starts with no bail and the most secure facility in the eastern USA you know what the future has in store.



Conversely, the 'how many others you are prepared to grass' aspect is a strong motivator for murder in a prison that hasn't had a suicide in 21 years. 

Suicide or murder, justice wont be served, & nothing will change. The money, properties, networks gifted to Epstein to enable rape/exploitation/blackmail will be reassigned to another useful but disposable facilitator, & the predatory rich will continue their behaviour. But if there's a chance he was murdered to shut him up, then there's a chance that someone's dropped a bollock along the way & exposed themselves, & it should be investigated as thoroughly & as skeptically as possible, no?


----------



## GarveyLives (Aug 16, 2019)

_



			"*Channel 4 News* can reveal that the Metropolitan Police began a review of "available evidence" in 2015 after receiving a complaint *over claims in court papers that a girl was "forced to have sex with Prince Andrew*".

Channel 4 News also understands that lawyers for Virginia Roberts independently contacted the Metropolitan Police in 2016.

The Metropolitan Police said it “reviewed the available evidence” and decided that the matter *“would not progress to a full investigation”*.

It is not clear what constituted the available evidence.

The Met Police has refused to answer detailed questions about the allegations and whether they ever spoke to Epstein, his friend Ghislaine Maxwell, *Prince Andrew* or anyone from the Royal Household.

Prince Andrew has always denied “any form of sexual contact or relationship with Virginia Roberts”.
		
Click to expand...

_
__​


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Aug 16, 2019)

His brother was good mates with Jimmy Savile and he was mates with Epstein. Do their advisors actually do anything?


----------



## xenon (Aug 16, 2019)

He's the shit pervy rapy prince right, or is that the other one?


----------



## binka (Aug 16, 2019)

Magnus McGinty said:


> His brother was good mates with Jimmy Savile and he was mates with Epstein. Do their advisors actually do anything?


To be fair they both seem thick as fuck, combined with the inevitable sense of superiority that comes with being called a prince I imagine they take advice from no one


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Aug 16, 2019)

binka said:


> To be fair they both seem thick as fuck, combined with the inevitable sense of superiority that comes with being called a prince I imagine they take advice from no one



True, it’s more a team of folk protecting their brand. What a job they have!


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 16, 2019)

I suspect Andy boy is shitting bricks at the moment, Even if completely innocent, mixing with known paedo's is the sort of thing that makes people think he's guilty by simple association. And if he isn't he must be wondering if Epstein left notes or even tapes that the FBI might find. 
Being a member of the Royal Family may impress Plod but it will cut no ice with the FBI, It will be interesting to see if they ask to question him.
If Epstein did actually top himself, for all we know he might very well have left a note pointing the Feds in the direction of his diary in a "I spit at you from beyond the grave"  Khan moment. 
With him dead there is also no motivation or justification for his lawyers to stop the FBI from ripping out the walls in that fancy house of his.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Aug 16, 2019)

Whose side are the FBI on, though? Given we know the accusations involve a Prince and perhaps a sitting president and a former one, doesn’t this all fall into the realms of ‘national security’?


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Aug 16, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> mixing with known paedo's is the sort of thing that makes people think he's guilty by simple association.



I’d like to think so but Charles’ very close relationship with Savile has never come under any kind of scrutiny. Savile apparently played advisor during the Prince’s breakdown of his marriage with Diana. The mind boggles.


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 16, 2019)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Whose side are the FBI on, though? Given we know the accusations involve a Prince and perhaps a sitting president and a former one, doesn’t this all fall into the realms of ‘national security’?


I seriously doubt that the FBI or any other law enforcement agency for that matter are involved in a conspiracy to protect rich pedo's, otherwise why did they even arrest him in the first place? Sure there are no doubt some bad apples but the idea that the FBI, CIA or the NSA or the Coast Guard are behind Epstein's death is conspiracy loonie tunes, I really don't think a US government agency would kill even a scumbag like Epstein to protect even the President from accusations of being a pedo. Individual agents maybe, some other dodgy financier who knows 'people who know people' sure but a government agency nope we're in Who bombed the Twin Towers territory again.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Aug 16, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> I seriously doubt that the FBI or any other law enforcement agency for that matter are involved in a conspiracy to protect rich pedo's, otherwise why did they even arrest him in the first place? Sure there are no doubt some bad apples but the idea that the FBI, CIA or the NSA or the Coast Guard are behind Epstein's death is conspiracy loonie tunes, I really don't think a US government agency would kill even a scumbag like Epstein to protect even the President from accusations of being a pedo. Individual agents maybe, some other dodgy financier who knows 'people who know people' sure but a government agency nope we're in Who bombed the Twin Towers territory again.



Yes we’re in that territory. But you claim it isn’t suicide so it’s you leading us into it.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 16, 2019)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Yes we’re in that territory. But you claim it isn’t suicide so it’s you leading us into it.


----------



## bluescreen (Aug 16, 2019)

From FT's news alert:
Jeffrey Epstein’s cause of death was suicide by hanging, according to a New York chief medical examiner determination cited by the Associated Press.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Aug 16, 2019)

existentialist said:


>



It isn’t a circular argument. Either we have fanciful theories or we don’t.


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 16, 2019)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Yes we’re in that territory. But you claim it isn’t suicide so it’s you leading us into it.


I'm perfectly willing to believe it was suicide, I have no more idea than you. But it does seem awfully convenient that it happened now. But a government agency bumping him off to protect Trump and Obama don't buy it. If he was murdered then I would think it more likely that one of his rich ex-buddies paid one or two guards (don't need many) to look the other way whilst some hired muscle did the deed maybe even another prisoner.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Aug 16, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> I'm perfectly willing to believe it was suicide, I have no more idea than you. But it does seem awfully convenient that it happened now. But a government agency bumping him off to protect Trump and Obama don't buy it. If he was murdered then I would think it more likely that one of his rich ex-buddies paid one or two guards (don't need many) to look the other way whilst some hired muscle did the deed maybe even another prisoner.



And those people immediately became willing participants despite the ocean of shit waiting for them if caught.


----------



## friedaweed (Aug 16, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> From FT's news alert:
> Jeffrey Epstein’s cause of death was suicide by hanging, according to a New York chief medical examiner determination cited by the Associated Press.


To be fair there's a long history of people who have been hanged in jail who didn't do it themselves. The only reason to believe that they did it themselves is to trust that at the time of their death the door was locked and they were alone. Almost impossible to prove in a private money making institution where the lights and the cctv can be switched off on demand. 

I have no trust in that country as to what happens to people who are  incarcerated under it's judicial system and then there's the dickwad that's currently in charge to consider and the lengths he's already gone to to hide his lies. I'm not a loon-spud but it's not inconceivable to think that Patsy's not at play...

There be precedent from previous presidents for what goes on behind closed doors.







That country is a shit hole.


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 16, 2019)

Magnus McGinty said:


> And those people immediately became willing participants despite the ocean of shit waiting for them if caught.


There's a wide spectrum of what might constitute willing and people do stuff that they know could get them in serious shit all the time.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Aug 16, 2019)

So then we need a plausible theory. Because the CIA doing him isn’t any less believable than guards and prisoners being paid to do it.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 16, 2019)

Magnus McGinty said:


> And those people immediately became willing participants despite the ocean of shit waiting for them if caught.


For the right price, why not? Being a prison guard is a pretty shit job. Who wouldn't want a potential way out of it?

I'm not saying he definitely was murdered, but I don't see any particular reason to think that murdering him would have been beyond the rich, connected, powerful folk who may have wanted him dead.

As for the corruptibility of the establishment, did you follow any of Hutton inquiry? At a rather less high-end level, how about the trouble they went to to cover up what happened to Mark Duggan?


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Aug 16, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> For the right price, why not? Being a prison guard is a pretty shit job. Who wouldn't want a potential way out of it?
> 
> I'm not saying he definitely was murdered, but I don't see any particular reason to think that murdering him would have been beyond the rich, connected, powerful folk who may have wanted him dead.



Because you’d need the collaboration of a few people. Perhaps the mob run that prison, that would be somewhat plausible. But what do guards on shit money owe them, or anyone?


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Aug 16, 2019)

And maybe the coroner is on the mob’s payroll. See how it expands?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 16, 2019)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Because you’d need the collaboration of a few people. Perhaps the mob run that prison, that would be somewhat plausible. But what do guards on shit money owe them, or anyone?


Um guards on shit money may not owe them, but the 'shit money' aspect of their work may be a clue as to how you might persuade them to cooperate.

As for the coroner, you're right, the fewer people involved the better. So you actually hang him. Coroner reports death by hanging. Job done.


----------



## friedaweed (Aug 16, 2019)

Once someone is in prison they are at the mercy of a whole lot more than the system that put them there. It's a whole new level of subterranean sub-society that operates under a very different system of wealth, currency and honour.

It's bad enough in the UK but we're fucking miles behind the worm hole that exists once you go down in the US of shit.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Aug 16, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Um guards on shit money may not owe them, but the 'shit money' aspect of their work may be a clue as to how you might persuade them to cooperate.
> 
> As for the coroner, you're right, the fewer people involved the better. So you actually hang him. Coroner reports death by hanging. Job done.



Surely it would have been simpler to have bumped him off on the outside though, rather than in a guarded state facility?


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 16, 2019)

Magnus McGinty said:


> And maybe the coroner is on the mob’s payroll. See how it expands?


Why would anyone bother to buy off the coroner? Epstein is dead he can't talk. Even if it's obvious he was murdered he still can't talk. That's all anyone wanting him dead needs.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 16, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> Why would anyone bother to buy off the coroner? Epstein is dead he can't talk. Even if it's obvious he was murdered he still can't talk. That's all anyone wanting him dead needs.


This is a good point. You pay a bunch of people a pile of cash to do it (masking your involvement from them appropriately of course in case they fuck it up). Then as long as they do it, if you were careful enough to mask your involvement, you don't actually need to care if they get caught or not. Their problem. 

Better, though, for it to be declared a suicide. Then the investigation stops there. So you arrange for it to look like a suicide, and pay the extra that takes. Not as if we're talking about people who lack funds. 

And if they did pay mob types to do it, why wouldn't they do a good job of it, which, if he was murdered, it appears they did? They will have experience of this kind of work after all. It's their line.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Aug 16, 2019)

I think even guards on shit money know that they’ll have to explain why cameras weren’t working and who had the keys to cells on which shifts etc.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Aug 16, 2019)

If conditions are that easy to breach there’d be loads of escapes and the like.


----------



## bluescreen (Aug 16, 2019)

Magnus McGinty said:


> I think even guards on shit money know that they’ll have to explain why cameras weren’t working and who had the keys to cells on which shifts etc.


Let's hope they all take care crossing the road.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 16, 2019)

Magnus McGinty said:


> I think even guards on shit money know that they’ll have to explain why cameras weren’t working and who had the keys to cells on which shifts etc.


And yet the cameras weren't working. Or at the very least, the death wasn't caught on camera. So we have levels of incompetence here. Not a good look for the prison. Or we have levels of corruption in which people were paid a pile of money to look like they're incompetent. 

I repeat that I'm not saying this is what happened, merely that we don't know, and given who is involved here and the stakes, we should refrain from credulity. But there are plenty of folk on here who think David Kelly killed himself, so I'll leave it there.


----------



## xenon (Aug 16, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> I seriously doubt that the FBI or any other law enforcement agency for that matter are involved in a conspiracy to protect rich pedo's, otherwise why did they even arrest him in the first place? Sure there are no doubt some bad apples but the idea that the FBI, CIA or the NSA or the Coast Guard are behind Epstein's death is conspiracy loonie tunes, I really don't think a US government agency would kill even a scumbag like Epstein to protect even the President from accusations of being a pedo. Individual agents maybe, some other dodgy financier who knows 'people who know people' sure but a government agency nope we're in Who bombed the Twin Towers territory again.





MickiQ said:


> I seriously doubt that the FBI or any other law enforcement agency for that matter are involved in a conspiracy to protect rich pedo's, otherwise why did they even arrest him in the first place? Sure there are no doubt some bad apples but the idea that the FBI, CIA or the NSA or the Coast Guard are behind Epstein's death is conspiracy loonie tunes, I really don't think a US government agency would kill even a scumbag like Epstein to protect even the President from accusations of being a pedo. Individual agents maybe, some other dodgy financier who knows 'people who know people' sure but a government agency nope we're in Who bombed the Twin Towers territory again.



You don't need believe in holographic planes to reasonably suspect the CIA of judiciously interviening in legal proceedings when deemed expedient. Christopher Coke etc.


----------



## xenon (Aug 16, 2019)

The Russians disappear people in their prison system. Magnitsky. But oh no, couldn't happen in the US for some reason.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 16, 2019)

xenon said:


> The Russians disappear people in their prison system. Natginksi. But oh no, couldn't happen in the US for some reason.


No they only train up death squads, provoke coups, assassinate and kidnap in johnny foreigner land. At home, they scrupulously respect the constitution.


----------



## bluescreen (Aug 16, 2019)

HM's offspring are a more persuasive popular argument for a republic than any appeal to theories of democracy.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Aug 16, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Or we have levels of corruption in which people were paid a pile of money to look like they're incompetent.



I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall in that meeting. What if they refused. Then what?


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Aug 16, 2019)

xenon said:


> The Russians disappear people in their prison system. Magnitsky. But oh no, couldn't happen in the US for some reason.



The Russians blatantly murder their expats who make too much noise and barely try to conceal it.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 16, 2019)

Magnus McGinty said:


> I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall in that meeting. What if they refused. Then what?


Following on from xenon's point, how do they do it in Russia, do you think? Or does the US somehow have different standards from Russia. Land of the Free and that.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 16, 2019)

Magnus McGinty said:


> The Russians blatantly murder their expats who make too much noise and don’t try to hide it.


The UK blatantly murdered one of their weapons inspectors. They did try to hide it. Or are you saying that's a wild conspiracy too?

I don't really get your line on this. We know this kind of thing is done by states. We know very rich, powerful people also have the power to do such things. But we should accept the official story unless we can prove it's wrong? That's a silly position. We should maintain a healthy scepticism of all official stories because we know that authorities lie.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Aug 16, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The UK blatantly murdered one of their weapons inspectors. They did try to hide it. Or are you saying that's a wild conspiracy too?



You have evidence that it isn’t?

I feel like I’ve wandered into some alternative universe where everyone has become Dr Jazzz.


----------



## bluescreen (Aug 16, 2019)

Magnus McGinty said:


> I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall in that meeting. What if they refused. Then what?


Don't they usually have people who've already been bribed or otherwise compromised, so they can call on them whenever they need something more serious doing? If bribery fails, there's always blackmail or that thing about _lovely daughter, shame if anything happened to her. _
Whoever 'they' are.


----------



## xenon (Aug 16, 2019)

Magnus McGinty said:


> The Russians blatantly murder their expats who make too much noise and barely try to conceal it.



True. Look I'm not saying let's go all conspiratorial on this but it would hardly be beyond the realm that Epstine  could have at the very least been allowed to top himself. Cui bono.


----------



## friedaweed (Aug 16, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> Don't they usually have people who've already been bribed or otherwise compromised, so they can call on them whenever they need something more serious doing? If bribery fails, there's always blackmail or that thing about _lovely daughter, shame if anything happened to her. _
> Whoever 'they' are.


Na they just tell them that they'll go to jail if they don't play ball where they can't be protected from the bad bad people.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Aug 16, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> Whoever 'they' are.



For argument’s sake, let’s refer to them from now on as the illuminati.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 16, 2019)

Magnus McGinty said:


> You have evidence that it isn’t?
> 
> I feel like I’ve wandered into some alternative universe where everyone has become Dr Jazzz.


There are silly conspiracy theories out there, so we should dismiss healthy scepticism towards dodgy official stories about very convenient deaths? 

As for Kelly, yes there is plenty of evidence that there was a cover-up. Not going into it again. Just cover your ears and call me Jazzz.


----------



## bluescreen (Aug 16, 2019)

Magnus McGinty said:


> For argument’s sake, let’s refer to them from now on as the illuminati.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 16, 2019)

Magnus McGinty said:


> For argument’s sake, let’s refer to them from now on as the illuminati.


There's no need ffs. You do know who we're talking about here? Rapist Jeffrey Epstein, big buddy with rapists Andrew cuntface, Donald Trump, Bill Clinton, etc. Who is now very conveniently dead.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 16, 2019)

Magnus McGinty said:


> You have evidence that it isn’t?
> 
> I feel like I’ve wandered into some alternative universe where everyone has become Dr Jazzz.


He doesn't  even know what role Kelly had. He wasn't a weapons inspector. His role was to firm up the attack on Iraq. Which he tried to, when he wasn't inventing  a racist chemical that only attacked black people for the apartheid state.  Weapons inspector ffs.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 16, 2019)

OH no. Someone got something slightly wrong on the internet. So everything else must be totally wrong. And he thinks Kelly was a saint. That must be it. Fuck's sake.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 16, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> OH no. Someone got something slightly wrong on the internet. So everything else must be totally wrong. And he thinks Kelly was a saint. That must be it. Fuck's sake.


Quite a big bit you got wrong. In fact, yeah...anyway. Enjoy.


----------



## friedaweed (Aug 16, 2019)

"Bernie Madoff, El Chapo and John Gotti have all spent time in the MCC"

It's not like it's Shawshank and there were only three guards, including two B lister rookie actors on the wing, and they we're having a circle jerk over a custard cream when all of a sudden they heard a groan echoing along the corridor 

I bet they slice the garlic thin in there...


----------



## Ming (Aug 16, 2019)

xenon said:


> He's the shit pervy rapy prince right, or is that the other one?


He used to be nicknamed ‘Randy Andy’ in the red tops.


----------



## bluescreen (Aug 16, 2019)

Ming said:


> He used to be nicknamed ‘Randy Andy’ in the red tops.


And 'Airmiles Andy'. Such a wonderful ambassador.

Does no one call him 'Randy Andy' any more? Is that because he has adopted a more chaste lifestyle?  
I suspect not.


----------



## Ming (Aug 16, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> And 'Airmiles Andy'. Such a wonderful ambassador.
> 
> Does no one call him 'Randy Andy' any more? Is that because he has adopted a more chaste lifestyle?
> I suspect not.


Yep.


----------



## Ming (Aug 16, 2019)

friedaweed said:


> "Bernie Madoff, El Chapo and John Gotti have all spent time in the MCC"
> 
> It's not like it's Shawshank and there were only three guards, including two B lister rookie actors on the wing, and they we're having a circle jerk over a custard cream when all of a sudden they heard a groan echoing along the corridor
> 
> I bet they slice the garlic thin in there...



I’ve got Henry Hill’s cookbook. It’s really good. Sunday Gravy is an amazing recipe. 
Google Image Result for https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/81KRLP5rPqL.jpg


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Aug 16, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> There's no need ffs. You do know who we're talking about here? Rapist Jeffrey Epstein, big buddy with rapists Andrew cuntface, Donald Trump, Bill Clinton, etc.



We already know what cunts these people are without the need to invent fact free shit up. Their crimes are already numerous.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 17, 2019)

**


----------



## phillm (Aug 18, 2019)

Hold your nose and read the MoS today - they have exclusive pics from 2010 of the Prince inside Epstein's mansion after he was convicted and a posse of young girls coming and going from the front door. Time for him to see if the Ecuadoreans have cleaned up Julian's room yet from his recent start - come on US get those extradition orders in place.........

The headline ought to read *"Guilty as Fuck?"*


----------



## teqniq (Aug 18, 2019)

Extradition? You do realise that's vanishingly unlikely as fuck.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 18, 2019)

teqniq said:


> Extradition? You do realise that's vanishingly unlikely as fuck.


A man can dream, a man can dream


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 18, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> And 'Airmiles Andy'. Such a wonderful ambassador.
> 
> Does no one call him 'Randy Andy' any more? Is that because he has adopted a more chaste lifestyle?
> I suspect not.


It's because people frown on men his age having partners of the age he prefers no doubt


----------



## tim (Aug 18, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> As for Kelly, yes there is plenty of evidence that there was a cover-up. Not going into it again. Just cover your ears and call me Jazzz.



If only you were as amusing as the good Doctor was!


----------



## tim (Aug 18, 2019)

friedaweed said:


> "Bernie Madoff, El Chapo and John Gotti have all spent time in the MCC"


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> she's handy with her fists, the queen, but not that handy



Good with the Glasgow Kiss though, is Brenda.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> he dares say nothing about the duke of edinburgh, the most feared assassination _meister_ in europe



Yep, the sick fuck who perfected the stranglewank hit, and invented the "speeding car in a tunnel" murder. A true _maestro_ (and I don't mean the Austin Maestro) of targeted murder and mayhem.


----------



## andysays (Aug 19, 2019)

Prince Andrew 'appalled' by Jeffrey Epstein's sex abuse claims


> A Buckingham Palace statement said: "The Duke of York has been appalled by the recent reports of Jeffrey Epstein's alleged crimes. His Royal Highness deplores the exploitation of any human being and the suggestion he would condone, participate in or encourage any such behaviour is abhorrent."


----------



## tim (Aug 19, 2019)

andysays said:


> Prince Andrew 'appalled' by Jeffrey Epstein's sex abuse claims



Unfortunate for our dear Prince that this photo was taken after Epstein had been released from gaol, having been convinced of child sexual abuse crimes.


----------



## krtek a houby (Aug 19, 2019)

Magnus McGinty said:


> You have evidence that it isn’t?
> 
> I feel like I’ve wandered into some alternative universe where everyone has become Dr Jazzz.



There's been murders in the 6 counties that had the whiff off high up collusion about them. It's fair enough to question the "official" versions without going full blown tin hat etc...


----------



## dessiato (Aug 19, 2019)

Given that the girl involved was 17, and the age of consent in the UK is 16 his statement that he didn't have sex with an underage girl is, in the very strictest sense, true. It doesn't in any way excuse his behaviour nor should it clear him of any wrongdoing. It also doesn't clear him of associating with a convicted pedophile nor any one of his other crimes.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 19, 2019)

dessiato said:


> Given that the girl involved was 17, and the age of consent in the UK is 16 his statement that he didn't have sex with an underage girl is, in the very strictest sense, true. It doesn't in any way excuse his behaviour nor should it clear him of any wrongdoing. It also doesn't clear him of associating with a convicted pedophile nor any one of his other crimes.


His paedo friend


----------



## bluescreen (Aug 19, 2019)

> A Buckingham Palace statement said: "The Duke of York has been appalled by the recent reports of Jeffrey Epstein's alleged crimes. His Royal Highness deplores the exploitation of any human being and the suggestion he would condone, participate in or encourage any such behaviour is abhorrent."


It would be newsworthy if HRH _wasn't_ appalled and _would _condone etc etc so it's not entirely, innocently clear why Buck House sees the need to state the obvious.

(But of course it is.)


----------



## dessiato (Aug 19, 2019)

The palace doth protest too much, methinks.


----------



## bluescreen (Aug 19, 2019)

dessiato said:


> The palace doth protest too much, methinks.


The rooster will crow.


----------



## Celyn (Aug 19, 2019)

Perhaps Prince Andrew could go around flying a helicopter or something and helicopter might just accidentally go all wrong. Oh dear! Andrew seems to be deadybones. How dreadfully sad.

Or he might go ski-ing in Verbier and just sort of trip up and fall down.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 19, 2019)

Celyn said:


> Perhaps Prince Andrew could go around flying a helicopter or something and helicopter might just accidentally go all wrong. Oh dear! Andrew seems to be deadybones. How dreadfully sad.
> 
> Or he might go ski-ing in Verbier and just sort of trip up and fall down.


there's no need to destroy an entire helicopter to get rid of andrew, the paedo's friend. he could simply be ejected halfway through the flight. or walk backwards through the tail rotor or something.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 19, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> It would be newsworthy if HRH _wasn't_ appalled and _would _condone etc etc so it's not entirely, innocently clear why Buck House sees the need to state the obvious.
> 
> (But of course it is.)


the suggestion he was might be appalling but i note the statement as quoted not in any way a denial it occurred. it's simply smoke and mirrors trying to make you think it's a denial.


----------



## Poi E (Aug 19, 2019)

Magnus McGinty said:


> True, it’s more a team of folk protecting their brand. What a job they have!



Why bother? The family have been shits for hundreds of years and they're still there.


----------



## andysays (Aug 19, 2019)

dessiato said:


> Given that the girl involved was 17, and the age of consent in the UK is 16 his statement that he didn't have sex with an underage girl is, in the very strictest sense, true. It doesn't in any way excuse his behaviour nor should it clear him of any wrongdoing. It also doesn't clear him of associating with a convicted pedophile nor any one of his other crimes.


Surely it's the age of consent in the place where the sex took place which is relevant (as well as the coercion).


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 19, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Why bother? The family have been shits for hundreds of years and they're still there.


for many hundreds of years - 1500 years ago this year cerdic founded the kingdom of wessex, and elizabeth traces her ancestry back to him.


----------



## krtek a houby (Aug 19, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Why bother? The family have been shits for hundreds of years and they're still there.



Nobs keep on knobbing. Used to be their divine right, or something like that?


----------



## Wilf (Aug 19, 2019)

tim said:


> Unfortunate for our dear Prince that this photo was taken after Epstein had been released from gaol, having been convinced of child sexual abuse crimes.


Behave, that's him telling Epstein how appalled he is!


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 19, 2019)

tim said:


> Unfortunate for our dear Prince that this photo was taken after Epstein had been released from gaol, having been convinced of child sexual abuse crimes.


that should be a caption competition photo


----------



## Wilf (Aug 19, 2019)

andysays said:


> Surely it's the age of consent in the place where the sex took place which is relevant (as well as the coercion).


Yes, indeed (and I think the allegation is exactly that, that he first had sex with her somewhere that the age of consent was 18 - without even getting into the coercion).


----------



## Wilf (Aug 19, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> that should be a caption competition photo


Hi Jeff, can you remind me to be appalled in 5 years? Oh and you may need to employ Clinton Baptiste to do the reminder. He'll be getting a word...


----------



## bluescreen (Aug 19, 2019)

BBC making a point.


----------



## dessiato (Aug 19, 2019)

andysays said:


> Surely it's the age of consent in the place where the sex took place which is relevant (as well as the coercion).


Yes it is, but he could claim, as he seems to be doing, that she was not underage so it was OK.


----------



## TopCat (Aug 19, 2019)

The women will come forward. Andrew is fucked.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 19, 2019)

TopCat said:


> The women will come forward. Andrew is fucked.


he'll exposed as the perv he is


----------



## Ming (Aug 19, 2019)

Almost a haiku (wrong rhythm).


----------



## Celyn (Aug 20, 2019)

Time for another royal wedding or pregnancy to divert attention. Or perhaps Philip could catch a cold or something to engineer outpourings of sympathy for the poor royals.


----------



## Ming (Aug 20, 2019)

Celyn said:


> Time for another royal wedding or pregnancy to divert attention. Or perhaps Philip could catch a cold or something to engineer outpourings of sympathy for the poor royals.


Queen Mother choking on a fish or Margaret pished  on the gin and fags?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 20, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Yes, indeed (and I think the allegation is exactly that, that he first had sex with her somewhere that the age of consent was 18 - without even getting into the coercion).





dessiato said:


> Yes it is, but he could claim, as he seems to be doing, that she was not underage so it was OK.



The allegation is she was shipped from Florida (age of consent 18) to the UK for the sexual pleasure of Prince Andrew. The fact that the age of consent in the UK is 16 doesn’t stop that being sex trafficking of a minor.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 20, 2019)

Ming said:


> Almost a haiku (wrong rhythm).


You want a disco beat under that


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 20, 2019)

Celyn said:


> Time for another royal wedding or pregnancy to divert attention. Or perhaps Philip could catch a cold or something to engineer outpourings of sympathy for the poor royals.


It's gone too far for a cold, one of them must be sacrificed like aslan only they won't be coming back. jadis elizabeth will do the deed herself


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 20, 2019)

BBC News - Jeffrey Epstein 'signed will two days before death'
Jeffrey Epstein 'signed will two days before death'


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Aug 20, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The allegation is she was shipped from Florida (age of consent 18) to the UK for the sexual pleasure of Prince Andrew. The fact that the age of consent in the UK is 16 doesn’t stop that being sex trafficking of a minor.



It is alleged he had sex with her three times: Once in the UK, once at Epstein's New York residence and once on his island. Although I'm unsure how old she was on each occasion.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 20, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> BBC News - Jeffrey Epstein 'signed will two days before death'
> Jeffrey Epstein 'signed will two days before death'



Interesting, I had an open mind on how he died, I thought suicide was most likely, but that has tipped the scales for me.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 20, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Interesting, I had an open mind on how he died, I thought suicide was most likely, but that has tipped the scales for me.


Yeah, done himself in. Wonder who the beneficiaries of the trust are, no kids I don't think


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 20, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Yeah, done himself in. Wonder who the beneficiaries of the trust are, no kids I don't think


the lawyers, as this will be fought in court for many years


----------



## GarveyLives (Aug 20, 2019)

How much trouble is Jeffrey Epstein's death for the Royal Family?

​


----------



## Ming (Aug 20, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> You want a disco beat under that


It’s all about the 1’s and three’s not the 2’s and 4’s. Stay funky.


----------



## badseed (Aug 21, 2019)

Two things that guilty people often do.
1. Come out for Jesus
2. Try and convey a wholesome family image.

Prince Andrew, pedophiles friend, has done both of these things in the last week.
Praying with his mother and going on his hols with Sarah.

I'm not suggesting that he is guilty, that would be ridiculous. Just an observation.


----------



## dylanredefined (Aug 22, 2019)

You would think with 500 million you could fuck off to somewhere without an extradition treaty.Or at least buy off the witnesses.


----------



## TopCat (Aug 22, 2019)

dylanredefined said:


> You would think with 500 million you could fuck off to somewhere without an extradition treaty.Or at least buy off the witnesses.


Buy off people you raped? Not with reported numbers. Plus all those complicit staff will be spilling the beans to lessen their responsibility.


----------



## dylanredefined (Aug 22, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Buy off people you raped? Not with reported numbers. Plus all those complicit staff will be spilling the beans to lessen their responsibility.



 Guess the system works then if even a rich and supposedly influential guy can end up in a cell.


----------



## planetgeli (Aug 22, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Buy off people you raped? Not with reported numbers. Plus all those complicit staff will be spilling the beans to lessen their responsibility.



But he did try.



> Prosecutors also accused Epstein of paying large amounts of money to two potential witnesses ahead of his trial, which was scheduled to take place next year.


----------



## TopCat (Aug 22, 2019)

planetgeli said:


> But he did try.


It's in the hundreds at least (his and cronies like Andrew's) victims.


----------



## hegley (Aug 22, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Buy off people you raped? Not with reported numbers. Plus all those complicit staff will be spilling the beans to lessen their responsibility.


Well it looks like he was pretty determined any victims won't get their hands on his money, even in death.

Jeffrey Epstein's will set up trust fund to shield $577m fortune days before death

What an absolute cunt's trick.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Aug 22, 2019)

hegley said:


> Well it looks like he was pretty determined any victims won't get their hands on his money, even in death.
> 
> Jeffrey Epstein's will set up trust fund to shield $577m fortune days before death
> 
> What an absolute cunt's trick.


indeed what a cunt


----------



## Wilf (Aug 22, 2019)

ruffneck23 said:


> indeed what a cunt


From the link:


> Bloom said it was “gross negligence” on the part of Epstein’s lawyers and jail personnel to allow him to sign a new will, given that he had apparently attempted suicide a short time before


 Indeed. Hope somebody gets some grief over this (unlikely though).


----------



## killer b (Aug 22, 2019)

Incredible that a man who groomed, trafficked and raped hundreds of girls might turn out to be a cunt.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 22, 2019)

Wilf said:


> From the link:
> Indeed. Hope somebody gets some grief over this (unlikely though).



Not in sound mind? Obviously meant to leave it all to me...


----------



## Wilf (Aug 22, 2019)

I get the impression that the good prince does very few royal engagements now. But if he does any in the future, wouldn't it be wise for his employer to get him CRB checked?


----------



## chandlerp (Aug 22, 2019)

He retired last week, due to stress.  No, really.


----------



## Quote (Aug 22, 2019)

Stress?!

Retirement?!?!

Hahahaha.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Aug 22, 2019)

Prince Andrew retires from not doing very much really to concentrate on being a Royal.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 22, 2019)

Can't be easy being a Nonce's Friend in today's media obsessed world.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 22, 2019)

A nonce with nothing to fill his days, I hope his devices get seized


----------



## Wilf (Aug 22, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> A nonce with nothing to fill his days, I hope his devices get seized


At least when he goes to church with his mam, he'll be able to talk to the priest about their shared interests.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 22, 2019)

And now foot massages:
Prince Andrew was seen getting foot massage from young woman at Epstein's apartment – report


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Aug 23, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I hope his devices get seized



Crippling our air force and navy in these trying times seems somewhat profligate


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 23, 2019)

Wilf said:


> And now foot massages:
> Prince Andrew was seen getting foot massage from young woman at Epstein's apartment – report


----------



## bluescreen (Aug 23, 2019)

Wilf said:


> And now foot massages:
> Prince Andrew was seen getting foot massage from young woman at Epstein's apartment – report


A _foot_? People do like to exaggerate.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 23, 2019)

dylanredefined said:


> You would think with 500 million you could fuck off to somewhere without an extradition treaty.Or at least buy off the witnesses.



He appears to have attempted the latter.


----------



## extra dry (Aug 23, 2019)

I think someone is about to take a fast taxi to the morgue.


----------



## A380 (Aug 24, 2019)




----------



## dylanredefined (Aug 24, 2019)

A380 said:


> View attachment 181932



 That's fucking horrifying


----------



## brogdale (Aug 24, 2019)

Saw or suspected nothing.



> “At no stage during the limited time I spent with him did I see, witness or suspect any behaviour of the sort that subsequently led to his arrest and conviction,” the duke said.
> 
> “I have said previously that it was a mistake and an error to see him after his release [from prison] in 2010 and I can only reiterate my regret that I was mistaken to think that what I thought I knew of him was evidently not the real person, given what we now know.”



Well, that'll close the matter obviously.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Aug 24, 2019)

Denials are amusing given those issuing them seldom have an incentive to say differently.


----------



## Poi E (Aug 24, 2019)

So he did not witness the specific events Epstein was convicted for. Perhaps why the DA didn't call him as a witness


----------



## tim (Aug 24, 2019)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Prince Andrew retires from not doing very much really to concentrate on being a Royal.



Until Brenda goes, after which he'll be diving into a butt of Malmsey.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 24, 2019)

Poi E said:


> So he did not witness the specific events Epstein was convicted for. Perhaps why the DA didn't call him as a witness


Yep, a 'denial' so limited in scope that you have to wonder at the panic amongst his people behind the scenes.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 24, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Yep, a 'denial' so limited in scope that you have to wonder at the panic amongst his people behind the scenes.


As more details come out about his 'limited time' with Epstein, it may well morph into 'I did not suspect but I accept that I should have done', the Albert Speer defence. One thing in his favour in selling that line - given who he is, being such a total moron isn't so unbelievable.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 24, 2019)

Looks like Windsor is admitting to meeting/staying with Epstein on between 20 to 40 occasions.



> "During the time I knew him, I saw him infrequently and *probably no more than only once or twice a year,*" the 59-year-old prince said.
> 
> "I have stayed in a number of his residences. At no stage during the limited time I spent with him did I see, witness or suspect any behaviour of the sort that subsequently led to his arrest and conviction."
> 
> The duke - who said *he first met Epstein in 1999* - added that he had "tremendous sympathy" for all those affected by Epstein's behaviour.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 24, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Looks like Windsor is admitting to meeting/staying with Epstein on between 20 to 40 occasions.


How many times would most people visit someone convicted of noncery after their release, unless they were themselves a nonce?


----------



## brogdale (Aug 24, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> How many times would most people visit someone convicted of noncery after their release, unless they were themselves a nonce?



The nonce formerly known as Prince Andrew Ƭ̵̬̊


----------



## tim (Aug 24, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> As more details come out about his 'limited time' with Epstein, it may well morph into 'I did not suspect but I accept that I should have done', the Albert Speer defence. One thing in his favour in selling that line - given who he is, being such a total moron isn't so unbelievable.




It's very unbelievable.


----------



## Poi E (Aug 24, 2019)

Article in the DM on the paedo prince and the second most popular comment was "ban the royals" after "what the hell?". Some clickbait in hating royals it seems.


----------



## andysays (Aug 24, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Looks like Windsor is admitting to meeting/staying with Epstein on between 20 to 40 occasions.


Even noted royal toady Nicholas Witchell recognises that it's "somewhat unlikely this statement will quell the questions about Andrew's good sense and judgement"...


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 24, 2019)

There's a sliding scale between not knowing and not suspecting and somewhere on that scale is not actually knowing but surely suspecting and I find it hard to believe that he didn't at least have an idea. He didn't just know Epstein, they seemed to be good friends after all casual acquaintances don't go round setting you
up with girls the same age as your daughter (neither do friends in my experience but he and I move in different circles)
He continues to deny any relationship with Virginia Roberts yet independent evidence continues to mount to support her story. She was 17 at the time so him sleeping with her (allegedly) wasn't actually a crime but middle aged men having sex with 17 yr olds and denying it doesn't really do much for his credibility.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 24, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Looks like Windsor is admitting to meeting/staying with Epstein on between 20 to 40 occasions.


Initially, I thought your maths was out there, assuming he didn't see him again after the 2010 photo was shot (which would mean he saw once or twice a year 1999-2010). But actually, that statement leaves open the notion he _has seen him since _2010. Maybe not since the court case where the judge decided evidence about Windsor was inadmissible (around 2015?) but certainly since 2010. Perhaps he really is that stupid.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 24, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> There's a sliding scale between not knowing and not suspecting and somewhere on that scale is not actually knowing but surely suspecting and I find it hard to believe that he didn't at least have an idea. He didn't just know Epstein, they seemed to be good friends after all casual acquaintances don't go round setting you
> up with girls the same age as your daughter (neither do friends in my experience but he and I move in different circles)
> He continues to deny any relationship with Virginia Roberts yet independent evidence continues to mount to support her story. She was 17 at the time so him sleeping with her (allegedly) wasn't actually a crime but middle aged men having sex with 17 yr olds and denying it doesn't really do much for his credibility.


But it was in at least one of the jurisdictions it is alleged to have happened (along with the coercion/trafficking issue)


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 24, 2019)

tim said:


> It's very unbelievable.


Oh indeed. As Speer's story was. A tissue of lies. But like Speer, it _could_ be enough to get him off.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 24, 2019)

He's not going to spend a single night in a cell, the filthy scumbag. I doubt that his victims will get a penny either.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 24, 2019)

Wilf said:


> He's not going to spend a single night in a cell, the filthy scumbag. I doubt that his victims will get a penny either.


Yeh let's hope he's shot 'trying to escape' before reaching the cells


----------



## bluescreen (Aug 24, 2019)

tim said:


> Until Brenda goes, after which he'll be diving into a butt of Malmsey.


If I were Brenda, or anyone else in that household, I'd be keeping my hand firmly over my teacup till after Brexit. As for the Duke of whatever he's the Duke of, he should consider his position. 
As they say.


----------



## tim (Aug 24, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> If I were Brenda, or anyone else in that household, I'd be keeping my hand firmly over my teacup till after Brexit. As for the Duke of whatever he's the Duke of, he should consider his position.
> As they say.



He probably has, and considers it fairly safe. He doesn't strike me as a revolver and glass of whiskey type, so don't expect him to do anything honourable


----------



## tim (Aug 24, 2019)

Here's a Duke being executed. I couldn't find a York so hope a Somerset will do


----------



## likesfish (Aug 24, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> There's a sliding scale between not knowing and not suspecting and somewhere on that scale is not actually knowing but surely suspecting and I find it hard to believe that he didn't at least have an idea. He didn't just know Epstein, they seemed to be good friends after all casual acquaintances don't go round setting you
> up with girls the same age as your daughter (neither do friends in my experience but he and I move in different circles)
> He continues to deny any relationship with Virginia Roberts yet independent evidence continues to mount to support her story. She was 17 at the time so him sleeping with her (allegedly) wasn't actually a crime but middle aged men having sex with 17 yr olds and denying it doesn't really do much for his credibility.



except when said 17year old has been trafficked and the consent is dubious
JAILED: 54-year-old prostitute user paid girl, 17, £200 for sex so yeah the prince of nocnes is heading for the big house


----------



## brogdale (Aug 25, 2019)

Another revelation from flight log records held by courts, like the ones that place Windsor & Giuffre together on 3 occasions she alleges sex with him. 



And another 'denial' of sorts:



> A source close to Andrew said the prince had “no recollection” of being on the 1999 flight with Malova.


----------



## tim (Aug 25, 2019)

likesfish said:


> except when said 17year old has been trafficked and the consent is dubious
> JAILED: 54-year-old prostitute user paid girl, 17, £200 for sex so yeah the prince of nocnes is heading for the big house




Yes, this big house.








For a few days hunting and fishing. He's now got even more free time to fill, as he's no longer  allowed to schmooze Central Asian despots


----------



## likesfish (Aug 25, 2019)

The royals can be utterly ruthless so keep up the pressure.
And Prince of nonce might die in an unfortunate helicopter accident


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 25, 2019)

likesfish said:


> The royals can be utterly ruthless so keep up the pressure.
> And Prince of nonce might die in an unfortunate helicopter accident


He will become an ambassador for water transport


----------



## extra dry (Aug 25, 2019)

I predict, that he will slip off the 33th step of his 3rd home, 11.58pm. Any mason will understand, just ask David Icke


----------



## brogdale (Aug 25, 2019)

TCJ's take...



"*...this other stuff."*


----------



## dessiato (Aug 25, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Another revelation from flight log records held by courts, like the ones that place Windsor & Giuffre together on 3 occasions she alleges sex with him.
> 
> View attachment 182003
> 
> And another 'denial' of sorts:


She looks so very young. Assuming that is from when she, allegedly, had sex with him he could not possibly have thought she was of age. Unless he was blind he could not have seen that.


----------



## Sprocket. (Aug 25, 2019)

Is Epstein really dead!
Or living on Skull Island with Robert Maxwell and Lord Lucan?


----------



## tim (Aug 25, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> Is Epstein really dead!
> Or living on Skull Island with Robert Maxwell and Lord Lucan?



I hope not!

(((Shergar)))


----------



## Waylon Jennings (Aug 26, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Too many.




Hey up you Stupid Cunt! How come you're sitting on the fence and not defending this one? Only Two replies since he kicked the bucket. You're not jumping down peoples throats as per usual who have differing opinions to yours calling them conspiracy nut jobs etc.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 26, 2019)

Waylon Jennings said:


> Hey up you Stupid Cunt! How come you're sitting on the fence and not defending this one? Only Two replies since he kicked the bucket. You're not jumping down peoples throats as per usual who have differing opinions to yours calling them conspiracy nut jobs etc.



Oh, this loon has resurfaced, what a twat.


----------



## TopCat (Aug 26, 2019)

Waylon Jennings said:


> Hey up you Stupid Cunt! How come you're sitting on the fence and not defending this one? Only Two replies since he kicked the bucket. You're not jumping down peoples throats as per usual who have differing opinions to yours calling them conspiracy nut jobs etc.


Waste of tonsils and intricate neck muscles.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Aug 26, 2019)

Got yourself a stalker!


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 26, 2019)

Mr.Bishie said:


> Got yourself a stalker!



I had a stalker, he's been banned for '_harassment, loonery'. _


----------



## TopCat (Aug 26, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> I had a stalker, he's been banned for '_harassment, loonery'. _


Who


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 26, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Who



No idea, mate.


----------



## kenny g (Aug 26, 2019)

Sad to see the name of such a fine musician being besmirched. I am sure Hank wouldn't have done it that way.


----------



## friedaweed (Aug 26, 2019)

Mr.Bishie said:


> Got yourself a stalker!


Not a laughing matter in my experience. These sort of cats can be quite dangerous when in pursuit of their goal


----------



## brogdale (Aug 27, 2019)

Today's Mail (apologies & no link) coverage of Virginia Roberts' comments outside today's NY Court Epstein hearing...


----------



## TopCat (Aug 27, 2019)

Drip drip the allegations flow. 

There becomes a tipping point though, even Royalists won't tolerate peados. They don't have the righteousness of the religious.


----------



## andysays (Aug 28, 2019)

Even the BBC are going with this now

Jeffrey Epstein accuser urges Prince Andrew to 'come clean'


----------



## Celyn (Aug 28, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Drip drip the allegations flow.
> 
> There becomes a tipping point though, even Royalists won't tolerate peados. They don't have the righteousness of the religious.


Andrew could carry on being oh-so-innocent-and-sorry, announce some new involvement with an appropriate Good Cause, his Mummy could get a tame bishop or two to say that he's a good chap, and then the media could become distracted and forget all about it.


----------



## dessiato (Aug 28, 2019)

I like to imagine the Queen berating him "You fucking arsesole! Now look what you've fucking gone and done, shagging a bit of underage fanny! You fucking twat!  I wish your dad had pulled out a bit quicker and left you on the bed sheet!" all the time standing on a stool so she could reach the back of his head as she beat him with a sceptre at each syllable.


----------



## JuanTwoThree (Aug 28, 2019)

A cynic might say that all the Wills-Kate-Harry-Meghan soap opera row  is a classic look-over-there ploy


----------



## JuanTwoThree (Aug 28, 2019)

dessiato said:


> on a stool



on a flunkey


----------



## killer b (Aug 28, 2019)

You should instead imagine the queen to be acting swiftly and ruthlessly to protect her family's privilege and position, like she always does.

_Underage fanny_ ffs tho dess. You're gross.


----------



## Poi E (Aug 28, 2019)

Think Brexit is a constitutional crisis? Wait till the old bitch kicks the bucket.


----------



## Sue (Aug 28, 2019)

killer b said:


> You should instead imagine the queen to be acting swiftly and ruthlessly to protect her family's privilege and position, like she always does.
> 
> _Underage fanny_ ffs tho dess. You're gross.


Indeed. Not a _person_, a _fanny_.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

Sue said:


> Indeed. Not a _person_, a _fanny_.


Yeh. But dessiato imagining the queen doing something, and tbh I can very easily imagine hm acting as dessiato imagines. I can't tho imagine dessiato acting in that manner or using the phrase 'underage fanny' outside his imagination. But unlike dessiato I don't like to imagine hm doing anything so tawdry, I don't like to think of her at all.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Think Brexit is a constitutional crisis? Wait till the old bitch kicks the bucket.


#charlesmustneverbeking


----------



## brogdale (Aug 28, 2019)

dessiato 's imagined scenario is all the more unlikely given that this unpleasant, sociopathic (alleged) abuser is reportedly the Monarch's favourite off-spring.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 28, 2019)

Also the idea that it's only just come to the queen's attention that her son is a nonce is implausible really isn't it


----------



## brogdale (Aug 28, 2019)

_Witch hunt _klaxon!


----------



## Tacit Apathy (Aug 28, 2019)

It's funny how it's always "no memory" like they're covering for some future moment where undeniable proof exists so that they can say "oh him!/her! I just didn't remember them".

It's never "I never met them", never a flat denial. Always couched in careful legalese. I'm sure those who follow American politics recall "I don't recall"... this looks strikingly similar.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

brogdale said:


> dessiato 's imagined scenario is all the more unlikely given that this unpleasant, sociopathic (alleged) abuser is reportedly the Monarch's favourite off-spring.


i don't see how that follows.


----------



## bluescreen (Aug 28, 2019)

brogdale said:


> _Witch hunt _klaxon!





> Prince says he has no memory of meeting Epstein 'sex slave'


Perhaps this will jog your memory, your RH?


----------



## brogdale (Aug 28, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> Perhaps this will jog your memory, your RH?


shopped, obvs


----------



## krtek a houby (Aug 28, 2019)

brogdale said:


> _Witch hunt _klaxon!
> 
> View attachment 182320



"Doubts over photo of Duke with accuser."

Well, clearly. Look at the size of his massive head compared to her.


----------



## urbanspaceman (Aug 28, 2019)

brogdale said:


> shopped, obvs


Yes, "sources close to the Prince" are actually claiming that the photo is fake.

One source told the Standard: 

_“Look at his fingers in the photo. The duke has quite chubby fingers, they don’t look right and nor does the height of the duke and the girl. I understand his legal team have asked to have proper sight of the original photograph so they can carry out their own investigation as they seriously doubt its veracity."
_
This is pitiful - they are actually trying to gaslight us. Both his hands are at least partially visible. And they seem to be a matching pair, notably sharing a reddish hue.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 28, 2019)

Tacit Apathy said:


> It's funny how it's always "no memory" like they're covering for some future moment where undeniable proof exists so that they can say "oh him!/her! I just didn't remember them".
> 
> It's never "I never met them", never a flat denial. Always couched in careful legalese. I'm sure those who follow American politics recall "I don't recall"... this looks strikingly similar.



Proof already exists. Multiple flight records showing randy andy and Virginia Giuffre on the passenger manifest. Hence 'I never met her' has already been downgraded to 'I meet so many teenage girls on private jets, she doesn't spring to mind'.


----------



## Tacit Apathy (Aug 28, 2019)

urbanspaceman said:


> And they seem to be a matching pair, notably sharing a reddish hue.


Ah, the ruddiness of the rich.



SpookyFrank said:


> Proof already exists. Multiple flight records showing randy andy and Virginia Giuffre on the passenger manifest. Hence 'I never met her' has already been downgraded to 'I meet so many teenage girls on private jets, she doesn't spring to mind'.


I hadn't yet got around to checking the flight logs. Thanks for the information.


----------



## JimW (Aug 28, 2019)

It's clearly a photo of him with an entirely different underage victim of abuse.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 28, 2019)

Tacit Apathy said:


> I hadn't yet got around to checking the flight logs. Thanks for the information.



The US courts have the relevant documentation already.


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 28, 2019)

urbanspaceman said:


> Yes, "sources close to the Prince" are actually claiming that the photo is fake.
> 
> One source told the Standard:
> 
> ...


There are doubts over the height of the girl  compared to the Duke seriously? Presumably they've never heard of high heels then?


----------



## spanglechick (Aug 28, 2019)

If you were going to shop an incriminating photo, wouldn’t you make it just a shade more incriminating? 

I’ve seen all kinds of excuses for the photo, including that she is grinning from ear to ear.  Seems like an odd one for the photoshoppers to create.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 30, 2019)

Mirror seem pleased as punch about getting this pic.



Mods: please delete the post if the copyright issue is a problem.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 30, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Mirror seem pleased as punch about getting this pic.
> 
> View attachment 182524
> 
> Mods: please delete the post if the copyright issue is a problem.


Windsor's eyes...they've been attracted by something...


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 30, 2019)

It's a good photo tbf, would be improved if Andy's mate Gaddafi (also an alleged nonce) had made an appearance though


----------



## hegley (Aug 30, 2019)

Quite like this one tbh:


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Aug 30, 2019)

He looks like he’s necked a gram of whizz.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 30, 2019)

hegley said:


> Quite like this one tbh:


Trump's fingers are not quite as chubby.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Aug 30, 2019)

hegley said:


> Quite like this one tbh:



Nice one, top one. What are you on? Got any underage trafficked girls? Nice.


----------



## Dandred (Aug 30, 2019)

COCAINE!


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 30, 2019)

hegley said:


> Quite like this one tbh:


----------



## Artaxerxes (Aug 30, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Think Brexit is a constitutional crisis? Wait till the old bitch kicks the bucket.


As long as we get the day off.

I'll even encourage the replacements to die so we get another one.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 30, 2019)

Artaxerxes said:


> As long as we get the day off.
> 
> I'll even encourage the replacements to die so we get another one.


just get harry to go nepalese on them


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 30, 2019)




----------



## brogdale (Sep 1, 2019)

Interesting expression of explanation from "former It Girl" Lady Victoria Hervey in yesterday's Mirror piece about Prince Andrew/Epstein...


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Sep 1, 2019)




----------



## cyril_smear (Sep 1, 2019)

hegley said:


> Quite like this one tbh:



Somebody's been on the flake ffs andy


----------



## Argonia (Sep 20, 2019)

Just saw testimony of a woman who claimed she was trafficked for Andrew on the news.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 20, 2019)

Argonia said:


> Just saw testimony of a woman who claimed she was trafficked for Andrew on the news.


This?


----------



## Badgers (Sep 20, 2019)

The plot thickens


----------



## Poi E (Sep 20, 2019)

Huh, his mum runs the country. She's well over 90. Her mates own a third of England, too. No wonder a prince gets to go paedo.


----------



## Argonia (Sep 21, 2019)

Sorry I haven't read the whole of this thread - is the parasite going to face justice or is he going to get away with it?


----------



## Poi E (Sep 21, 2019)

Give you one guess.


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 21, 2019)

not even exile to the bahamas like they did with the nazi one in ww2.


----------



## Poi E (Sep 21, 2019)

The Queen could always send him on a boating holiday in Ireland.


----------



## gosub (Sep 21, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> not even exile to the bahamas like they did with the nazi one in ww2.


Tbf That would be quite a different prospect at the moment


----------



## Don Troooomp (Sep 21, 2019)

There's shit all serious evidence of what's what with Prince Charming except a couple of really inconvenient photos that don't say very much as such, just he was there.
However, I believe there's a better than average chance the allegations are true.


----------



## Santino (Sep 21, 2019)

Don Troooomp said:


> There's shit all serious evidence of what's what with Prince Charming except a couple of really inconvenient photos that don't say very much as such, just he was there.
> However, I believe there's a better than average chance the allegations are true.


What about the testimony of his victim?


----------



## dylanredefined (Sep 21, 2019)

Don Troooomp said:


> There's shit all serious evidence of what's what with Prince Charming except a couple of really inconvenient photos that don't say very much as such, just he was there.
> However, I believe there's a better than average chance the allegations are true.





Santino said:


> What about the testimony of his victim?



 Had drinks with a teenager went back to a house and had sex with her.
 No evidence that he knew she was doing it against her will. Never appears to be very smart so might think he scored because he is royalty. Or just thinking with his dick.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 21, 2019)

dylanredefined said:


> Had drinks with a teenager went back to a house and had sex with her.
> No evidence that he knew she was doing it against her will. Never appears to be very smart so might think he scored because he is royalty. Or just thinking with his dick.



Should a man in his 40s have a dick that thinks I want to shag 17 year olds, I dunno


----------



## Throbbing Angel (Sep 21, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Should a man in his 40s have a dick that thinks I want to shag 17 year olds, I dunno



Ephebophile?


----------



## dylanredefined (Sep 21, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Should a man in his 40s have a dick that thinks I want to shag 17 year olds, I dunno



 Legal if distasteful. No clue if it was reasonable to expect it to be consensual or not. Not being a rich bloke or royalty going to rich people night clubs.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 21, 2019)

dylanredefined said:


> Legal if distasteful. No clue if it was reasonable to expect it to be consensual or not. Not being a rich bloke or royalty going to rich people night clubs.


Young woman was trafficked and, anyway, if non-consensual = rape.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 21, 2019)

I reckon any man in his 40s who gets offered a girl under age of 18 to sleep with by his mate should have some concerns, I don't think there is any getting away from the dubiousness of it.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 21, 2019)

I'd have thought travelling to pedo-Island with the pedo owner of the pedo-island to have sex with a very young woman would have rung a couple of alarm bells.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Sep 21, 2019)

He should definitely go for the "but it's perfectly legal" defence, I reckon that would be highly effective and entirely restore his reputation.


----------



## rekil (Sep 21, 2019)

The Onion defence is worth a shot.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 21, 2019)

Random thought: presumably Windsor has royal protection officers with him, when in America or on his visits to nonce island, but certainly in London. Would I be a million miles out thinking that the Met didn't interview them when they decided this didn't need to move to a 'full investigation'?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Sep 21, 2019)

I'm sure the Met performed all due diligence when investigating any possible sex crimes of this immensely wealthy and well-connected person. I am 100% positive that every aspect would have been explored to make sure a member of the royal family was not involved, without fear or favour. Their reputation wold suggest nothing less.


----------



## Poi E (Sep 21, 2019)

Well, they acted on the Saville rumours promptly.


----------



## friedaweed (Sep 21, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Well, they acted on the Saville rumours promptly.


Aye and now the main guy who could of grassed on them all has been found...errr..hanging in his cell


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 21, 2019)

dylanredefined said:


> Had drinks with a teenager went back to a house and had sex with her.
> No evidence that he knew she was doing it against her will. Never appears to be very smart so might think he scored because he is royalty. Or just thinking with his dick.




Buck House statement:

“It is emphatically denied that the Duke of York had any form of sexual contact or relationship with [Giuffre]. The allegations made are false and without any foundation."


----------



## brogdale (Sep 21, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Buck House statement:
> 
> “It is emphatically denied that the Duke of York had any form of sexual contact or relationship with [Giuffre]. The allegations made are false and without any foundation."


Very Clintonian


----------



## emanymton (Sep 22, 2019)

https://nypost.com/2019/09/21/damning-evidence-on-prince-andrew-could-be-in-russian-hands-mi6/

Considering his innocence I can't understand what they are worried about.


----------



## gosub (Sep 22, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Very Clintonian



Any similarity between HRH Prince Andrew's relationship with convicted and deceased pedophile Jeffery Epstein, and that of the 42nd President of the United States (or the 45th for that matter) is purely coincidental


----------



## Don Troooomp (Sep 23, 2019)

Santino said:


> What about the testimony of his victim?



Prince Vs. unknown that stands to make a fortune for her story.
That doesn't she isn't telling the truth, but truth means fuck all unless she can back it up with more than a photo outside a house. As it happens, I believe her, but cash and power means her chances of getting that over to anyone that matters are limited.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 23, 2019)

Don Troooomp said:


> Prince Vs. unknown that stands to make a fortune for her story.
> That doesn't she isn't telling the truth, but truth means fuck all unless she can back it up with more than a photo outside a house. As it happens, I believe her, but cash and power means her chances of getting that over to anyone that matters are limited.


you obviously don't think much of public opinion.


----------



## Don Troooomp (Sep 23, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> you obviously don't think much of public opinion.



Depends. In this case it's a matter of weighing up probabilities and I came down to he's a slimy twat and she sounds very much credible. 
I have no clue what the majority think of this but I think she's probably telling the truth.
The day I  change my thoughts based on public opinion only will be the day I blast my brains out because they won't be worth keeping if I can't think for myself.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 23, 2019)

Don Troooomp said:


> Depends. In this case it's a matter of weighing up probabilities and I came down to he's a slimy twat and she sounds very much credible.
> I have no clue what the majority think of this but I think she's probably telling the truth.
> The day I  change my thoughts based on public opinion only will be the day I blast my brains out because they won't be worth keeping if I can't think for myself.


you've made it clear that iyo the public aren't people who matter


----------



## Don Troooomp (Sep 23, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> you've made it clear that iyo the public aren't people who matter



In criminal cases, it's the authorities and courts, and there's sod all chance a British Prince will get arrested or even charged.
Hardly matters what public opinion says, it won't happen. As I said above, my brain, such as it is, would be a waste of space if I allowed my thoughts to be decided by the opinions of others.
Cogito, ergo sum.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 23, 2019)

_ I do not think it means what you think it means._


----------



## Don Troooomp (Sep 23, 2019)

I think therefore I am.
If my thoughts, feelings, and opinions are decided by others, or I'm too scared to voice them because either loss of popularity or fear of violence in whatever form, I can no longer claim independent thought so the one real freedom we have would be lost to me.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 23, 2019)

Don Troooomp said:


> In criminal cases, it's the authorities and courts, and there's sod all chance a British Prince will get arrested or even charged.
> Hardly matters what public opinion says, it won't happen. As I said above, my brain, such as it is, would be a waste of space if I allowed my thoughts to be decided by the opinions of others.
> Cogito, ergo sum.


So you've given up reading anything which might contain the opinions of others.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 23, 2019)

Don Troooomp said:


> I think therefore I am.
> If my thoughts, feelings, and opinions are decided by others, or I'm too scared to voice them because either loss of popularity or fear of violence in whatever form, I can no longer claim independent thought so the one real freedom we have would be lost to me.


Yeah, _thought not_.

(That's a play on words and the meaning of the phrase you've just misused btw)


----------



## Don Troooomp (Sep 23, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> So you've given up reading anything which might contain the opinions of others.



Not at all. If I fail to explore the thoughts and opinions others hold I can't truly form my own opinions. I even read far right crap, not because I agree with it, but because I must be able to argue against it or admit my opinions regarding freedom, fairness and equality for all are wrong, or I'm too uneducated to be in the game.
In the case of the naughty prince, I don't believe his version but I still have read his point of view or my opinion would be based purely on political bias, not a weighing up of the stories.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 23, 2019)

Don Troooomp said:


> my brain, such as it is, would be a waste of space if I allowed my thoughts to be decided by the opinions of others.


but you then go on to say you seek out other people's opinions which you then use in the formation of your views. you are allowing other people to decide your views. in fact, you say it is an essential part of your thinking process.


----------



## killer b (Sep 23, 2019)

what the fuck


----------



## killer b (Sep 23, 2019)

anyway, how many contestants of _It's a Royal Knockout_ have now been unmasked as massive nonces? Must be in double figures by now?


----------



## Don Troooomp (Sep 23, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Yeah, _thought not_.
> 
> (That's a play on words and the meaning of the phrase you've just misused btw)




OMG. Your trolling us an interesting diversion from blowing my snotty nose but it's getting to the point it's unworthy of you.
Unless you explore and question everything, you can't form a well thought out opinion on any subject.
Public opinion is nothing to do with independent thought so, if you think it is, you are clearly not worth debating with.


----------



## Don Troooomp (Sep 23, 2019)

killer b said:


> anyway, how many contestants of _It's a Royal Knockout_ have now been unmasked as massive nonces? Must be in double figures by now?



There have been loads spread over history so this is hardly new. The only new thing is bothering to deny it.
She comes over as believable, he does not.


----------



## Don Troooomp (Sep 23, 2019)

killer b said:


> what the fuck



Yes, that's what this is about


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 23, 2019)

killer b said:


> anyway, how many contestants of _It's a Royal Knockout_ have now been unmasked as massive nonces? Must be in double figures by now?


not sure how many of these have been convicted but i'm noting one or two who have at least gained popular acceptance they're nonces.



as a bonus of course there was the nonce stuart hall, altho he wasn't a contestant


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 24, 2019)

Hmmm

BBC News - Prince Andrew event at University of South Wales 'alarming'
Prince Andrew event in Newport uni 'alarming'


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 24, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Hmmm
> 
> BBC News - Prince Andrew event at University of South Wales 'alarming'
> Prince Andrew event in Newport uni 'alarming'



Has he been DBS checked?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 21, 2019)

Obviously looking to boost viewing figures for the documentary...but hey...useful headlines.


----------



## existentialist (Oct 21, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Should a man in his 40s have a dick that thinks I want to shag 17 year olds, I dunno


There's a lot of difference between "I want to shag..." and actually doing it. That's the bit that matters.


----------



## MrSki (Oct 22, 2019)

Have we had this one yet?


----------



## Poi E (Oct 23, 2019)

Edited.


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 23, 2019)

I don't know who the child is, but it's probably not on to be broadcasting her likeness.


----------



## Poi E (Oct 23, 2019)

Fair enough. 

Wonder if the quid pro quo for not looking closely at Windsor is the UK govt not kicking up a fuss about the spook's wife flown out of the country after killing a lad.


----------



## badseed (Oct 23, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Fair enough.
> 
> Wonder if the quid pro quo for not looking closely at Windsor is the UK govt not kicking up a fuss about the spook's wife flown out of the country after killing a lad.


Or giving them Assange


----------



## Wilf (Oct 23, 2019)

I'm not sure the yanks want to dig into Epstein's mates too thoroughly anyway. Only a short step to the 42nd and 45th Presidents.


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 10, 2019)

American news network ABC had the Epstein story ready to publish 3 years ago but it was quashed from publishing due to pressure from Buckingham Palace and network bosses worried they would lose access to interviewing Kate and Will - according to leaked footage provided to Project Veritas from an unnamed whistleblower.


----------



## Rosemary Jest (Nov 14, 2019)

Just watched the Despatches documentary, nothing new but quite interesting all the same. 

The Behind the Bastards podcast on Epstein is worth listening to, apparently Stephen Hawking was a mate and regular visitor to his paedo island, along with Andrew and Bill Clinton.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2019)

Rosemary Jest said:


> Just watched the Despatches documentary, nothing new but quite interesting all the same.
> 
> The Behind the Bastards podcast on Epstein is worth listening to, apparently Stephen Hawking was a mate and regular visitor to his paedo island, along with Andrew and Bill Clinton.


2015 Torygraph story Stephen Hawking pictured on Jeffrey Epstein's 'Island of Sin'


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 14, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> American news network ABC had the Epstein story ready to publish 3 years ago but it was quashed from publishing due to pressure from Buckingham Palace and network bosses worried they would lose access to interviewing Kate and Will - according to leaked footage provided to Project Veritas from an unnamed whistleblower.



Wow, so what you're saying on a thread started nearly five years ago is that nearly four years ago someone else didn't run the story that this thread is about and you were made aware of this by a shitty semi proud boy/jeremy beadle right wing disinformation outfit (as are many of your posts). Thanks for that.


----------



## stuff_it (Nov 14, 2019)

Not saying it's related, but I'm sure there was a rumour a fair few years ago that a member of household staff was raped by an unnamed royal.... 

Does anyone else remember this rumour?


----------



## belboid (Nov 14, 2019)

stuff_it said:


> Not saying it's related, but I'm sure there was a rumour a fair few years ago that a member of household staff was raped by an unnamed royal....
> 
> Does anyone else remember this rumour?


are you thinking of George Smith?  George Smith (royal servant) - Wikipedia


----------



## stuff_it (Nov 14, 2019)

belboid said:


> are you thinking of George Smith?  George Smith (royal servant) - Wikipedia


 That's probably the one.


----------



## elbows (Nov 15, 2019)

"no holds barred" propaganda incoming.

Duke of York gives first interview about Epstein



> The Duke of York has answered questions about his links to Jeffrey Epstein for the first time, in a BBC interview.
> 
> He spoke to BBC Newsnight's Emily Maitlis in an interview recorded at Buckingham Palace on Thursday.
> 
> Maitlis said it was a "no holds barred interview", which will be broadcast on BBC Two at 21:00 GMT on Saturday.


----------



## Chilli.s (Nov 15, 2019)

"no holds barred whitewash"


----------



## brogdale (Nov 15, 2019)

elbows said:


> "no holds barred" propaganda incoming.
> 
> Duke of York gives first interview about Epstein





> Maitlis said it was a "no holds barred interview"


as she attempted to get up from her curtsy


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 15, 2019)

“I’m going to be completely open and frank, Dame Emily. I mean, Ms Maitlis. Silly me”.


----------



## dessiato (Nov 16, 2019)

BBC News - Prince Andrew interview: Jeffrey Epstein stay was 'wrong thing to do'
Epstein stay 'wrong thing to do' - Prince Andrew


----------



## andysays (Nov 16, 2019)

dessiato said:


> BBC News - Prince Andrew interview: Jeffrey Epstein stay was 'wrong thing to do'
> Epstein stay 'wrong thing to do' - Prince Andrew





> Challenged on his decision to stay at the home of a convicted sex offender, the prince said: "It was a convenient place to stay. I mean I've gone through this in my mind so many times.





> At the end of the day, with a benefit of all the hindsight that one can have, it was definitely the wrong thing to do."





> "But at the time I felt it was the honourable and right thing to do and I admit fully that my judgement was probably coloured by my tendency to be too honourable but that's just the way it is."


I wonder why he's decided to give this interview now and actually say this stuff, TBH, because he really doesn't do himself any favours with stuff like this


----------



## brogdale (Nov 16, 2019)

andysays said:


> I wonder why he's decided to give this interview now and actually say this stuff, TBH, because he really doesn't do himself any favours with stuff like this


He obviously thought that by saying he had no recollection of the then Miss Roberts; that would be then end of the matter.
Let's hope that he lives to regret that tactic.


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 16, 2019)




----------



## Badgers (Nov 16, 2019)

Last time I fucked a kid I was relieved to be dealt with by the BBC and not the police #jesuisandy


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 16, 2019)

andysays said:


> I wonder why he's decided to give this interview now and actually say this stuff, TBH, because he really doesn't do himself any favours with stuff like this


Because the truth does him even fewer favours.


----------



## teqniq (Nov 16, 2019)

i haven't read it but I surmise it's all about damage limitation. Will it work though?


----------



## TopCat (Nov 16, 2019)

Arrogant fucker he is thinking this will quench questions.


----------



## elbows (Nov 16, 2019)

Yes he hopes it will draw a line under his penis, but it turns out this line may actually be cheesewire.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 16, 2019)

Disgraced Prime Minister Johnson:


> Let me tell you something, I've worked with Prince Andrew, I've seen the good he has been able to do for UK business overseas and other than that I have no comment.
> 
> I have no comment, or indeed no knowledge of this other stuff.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 16, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Arrogant fucker he is thinking this will quench questions.


The thick entitled parasite


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 16, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


>



There's an n too many in that tweet


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 16, 2019)

I hang around with convicted nonces because I'm honourable. A team of people have come up with that, that's the best they could do.


----------



## killer b (Nov 16, 2019)

Too honourable to say no to the convicted child rapist when he invited me to stay in his palatial mansion. In many ways, isn't Andrew the victim here? His good nature preyed upon by an abuser.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 16, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I hang around with convicted nonces because I'm honourable. A team of people have come up with that, that's the best they could do.


it's a mispronunciation of horrible


----------



## rekil (Nov 16, 2019)

killer b said:


> Too honourable to say no to the convicted child rapist when he invited me to stay in his palatial mansion. In many ways, isn't Andrew the victim here? His good nature preyed upon by an abuser.


The Onion did this already. Maybe their writers are coaching him.

Jeffrey Epstein Swears He Didn’t Know Sex-Trafficking Ring Was Underage



> "Had I known, I would have told them to go right back to wherever it was I smuggled them from and tricked some adult women into my horrific sex-trafficking ring. I guess in some ways, you could say that I’m the real victim here.”


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 16, 2019)

killer b said:


> Too honourable to say no to the convicted child rapist when he invited me to stay in his palatial mansion. In many ways, isn't Andrew the victim here? His good nature preyed upon by an abuser.


And don't forget, it was convenient.  Who among us can truly say we haven't gone out of our way to stay at the mansion of a convicted abuser when it was convenient?


----------



## Ming (Nov 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> And don't forget, it was convenient.  Who among us can truly say we haven't gone out of our way to stay at the mansion of a convicted abuser when it was convenient?


Let him who is without sin...


----------



## andysays (Nov 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Because the truth does him even fewer favours.


I'm sure that's true,  but why give this interview now/at all, especially if this is the best he and his advisers can come up with?

Better to remain silent and be thought a twat than to speak and confirm it, or whatever the line that Pickman's model likes to quote


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 16, 2019)

andysays said:


> I'm sure that's true,  but why give this interview now/at all, especially if this is the best he and his advisers can come up with?
> 
> Better to remain silent and be thought a twat than to speak and confirm it, or whatever the line that Pickman's model likes to quote


Yes, it’s a very poor decision. I can only assume it’s one of those things where it was felt he has to get his side of the story out before something else breaks.


----------



## clicker (Nov 16, 2019)

We've been lucky to have been spared hearing very much from him for decades. This has only confirmed the reason why.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Yes, it’s a very poor decision. I can only assume it’s one of those things where it was felt he has to get his side of the story out before something else breaks.


What if further pics and possibly footage of him with the young woman he was previously pictured with and has no recollection over come out? He will be utterly fucked.


----------



## clicker (Nov 16, 2019)

TopCat said:


> What if further pics and possibly footage of him with the young woman he was previously pictured with and has no recollection over come out? He will be utterly fucked.


I don't think that's possible.
Eta the him being more fucked bit. Nobody believes him now.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 16, 2019)

Re the convenient place to stay thing, Manhattan is famous for its lack of high end hotels, so that adds up...


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 16, 2019)

no recollection of a big night out, wining and dining, tramps and sex with a young woman. Fuck me, he must leave a hedonistic life if that slips his memory. I can remember being sick on my shoes after a night in a mecca club in 1990. Weasly entitled arrogrant prick


----------



## TopCat (Nov 16, 2019)

The quote about if he was wrong at all it was to be too honourable in his dealings with Epstein, his face while he says this. Thoughts? ....


----------



## andysays (Nov 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Yes, it’s a very poor decision. I can only assume it’s one of those things where it was felt he has to get his side of the story out before something else breaks.


Yeah, and that suggests that he thinks that there *is* something else which is about to break.


----------



## agricola (Nov 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Yes, it’s a very poor decision. I can only assume it’s one of those things where it was felt he has to get his side of the story out before something else breaks.



Probably, though there has always been an argument that he would be a very convienient person to frame the Epstein scandal around - after all, he is now a relatively minor royal rather one of the many people who had similar links to Epstein (and other similar types) and who have so far escaped questions as to why they were close with him.


----------



## Buckaroo (Nov 16, 2019)

copliker said:


> The Onion did this already. Maybe their writers are coaching him.
> 
> Jeffrey Epstein Swears He Didn’t Know Sex-Trafficking Ring Was Underage



Dershowitz was on radio this morning saying he was the real victim of false accusations and he was proud of keeping Epstein out of jail, job well done. Said he went round to Epstein's for massage by professional massage therapists who were all age 40-50. Said he brought his wife with him.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Nov 16, 2019)

andysays said:


> Yeah, and that suggests that he thinks that there *is* something else which is about to break.



Series 3 of The Crown introduces Camilla Parker-Bowles and Diana Spencer?


----------



## Hollis (Nov 16, 2019)

In response to his 'don't recall' answer, I hope Matlis probed him on whether it was the case he was was shagging around so much at the time, that he just couldn't remember..


----------



## Buddy Bradley (Nov 16, 2019)

Hollis said:


> In response to his 'don't recall' answer, I hope Matlis probed him on whether it was the case he was was shagging around so much at the time, that he just couldn't remember..


All those underage girls start to look the same after a while.


----------



## Manter (Nov 16, 2019)

Why the fuck isn’t he being interviewed under police caution? He’s being allowed to get away  with this- it’s corrupt


----------



## Buckaroo (Nov 16, 2019)




----------



## tim (Nov 16, 2019)

Manter said:


> Why the fuck isn’t he being interviewed under police caution? He’s being allowed to get away  with this- it’s corrupt



Being sleazy arrogantand overprivileged are not crimes. He has been accused of having sex with a seventeen year old, which is not a crime in the UK, even though it may be in the jurisdiction in which he is alleged to have done it. Remember the rather weasley denial the Palace made on his behalf: “Any suggestion of impropriety with underage minors is categorically untrue." Not all "minors", in the UK at least, are under the age of consent; that's the difference between being under 16 and under 18. A point made clear in the case in the media today of the headteacher who was sacked got having sex with two seventeen year olds and has been awarded £700,000 for unlawful dismissal.



> A primary school headteacher sacked after having sex with two 17-year-old boys he met through a gay dating app has been awarded nearly £700,000 compensation by a tribunal.




Head who had sex with two teenage boys he met on Grindr wins £700k at tribunal

The Princeling also stayed in the house of a convicted paedophile who had served his absurdly lenient sentence, that's clearly not a crime, either.


----------



## Manter (Nov 16, 2019)

tim said:


> Being sleazy arrogantand overprivileged are not crimes. He has been accused of having sex with a seventeen year old, which is not a crime in the UK, even though it may be in the jurisdiction in which he is alleged to have done it. Remember the rather weasley denial the Palace made on his behalf: “Any suggestion of impropriety with underage minors is categorically untrue." Not all "minors", in the UK at least, are under the age of consent; that's the difference between being under 16 and under 18. A point made clear in the case in the media today of the headteacher who was sacked got having sex with two seventeen year olds and has been awarded £700,000 for unlawful dismissal.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Which is why the police interview someone. If you are an associate of a child abuser, there are accusations about you, you are involved in a paedophile ring, they investigate and interview, surely?


----------



## Rosemary Jest (Nov 16, 2019)

Manter said:


> Which is why the police interview someone. If you are an associate of a child abuser, there are accusations about you, you are involved in a paedophile ring, they investigate and interview, surely?



Not if you're the son of the Queen they don't.


----------



## Manter (Nov 16, 2019)

Rosemary Jest said:


> Not if you're the son of the Queen they don't.


Back to the corrupt word


----------



## tim (Nov 16, 2019)

Rosemary Jest said:


> Not if you're the son of the Queen they don't.



Not after Carl, they don't!


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 16, 2019)

tim said:


> Being sleazy arrogantand overprivileged are not crimes. He has been accused of having sex with a seventeen year old, which is not a crime in the UK, even though it may be in the jurisdiction in which he is alleged to have done it...


Flight records show her being brought to the UK multiple times and that famous picture with Andy is apparently in Ghisaine Maxwell's flat in London.

e2a and of course her age doesn't matter if she's being sex-trafficked.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> And don't forget, it was convenient.  Who among us can truly say we haven't gone out of our way to stay at the mansion of a convicted abuser when it was convenient?


Convenience is the key word here. Most honourable men when faced with finding somewhere to stay in New York wouldn't be arsed feckin' around on Tripadviser. So much easier to go to Pedomansions owned by a convicted Pedo. Ditto flights to Pedoisland. Who amongst us wouldn't hop aboard a Pedoflight, in a plane owned by ...


----------



## TopCat (Nov 16, 2019)

Top of the rolling news all day.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 16, 2019)

In terms of legal action, the UK police could presumably only interview him about sex with/rape of* the woman in London. Or possibly sex tourism legislation for the nonce island stuff?  Otherwise it's up to US authorities calling on him as a witness.

* Let's add the word 'alleged', but that is what it would be if she was trafficked?


----------



## Detroit City (Nov 16, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Convenience is the key word here. Most honourable men when faced with finding somewhere to stay in New York wouldn't be arsed feckin' around on Tripadviser. So much easier to go to Pedomansions owned by a convicted Pedo. Ditto flights to Pedoisland. Who amongst us wouldn't hop aboard a Pedoflight, in a plane owned by ...


BAAAHHAHAHAHA


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 16, 2019)

tim said:


> Being sleazy arrogantand overprivileged are not crimes. He has been accused of having sex with a seventeen year old, which is not a crime in the UK, even though it may be in the jurisdiction in which he is alleged to have done it. Remember the rather weasley denial the Palace made on his behalf: “Any suggestion of impropriety with underage minors is categorically untrue." Not all "minors", in the UK at least, are under the age of consent; that's the difference between being under 16 and under 18. A point made clear in the case in the media today of the headteacher who was sacked got having sex with two seventeen year olds and has been awarded £700,000 for unlawful dismissal.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Who would a nonce invite round and for what malign pursuits?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 16, 2019)

Wilf said:


> In terms of legal action, the UK police could presumably only interview him about sex with/rape of* the woman in London. Or possibly sex tourism legislation for the nonce island stuff?  Otherwise it's up to US authorities calling on him as a witness.
> 
> * Let's add the word 'alleged', but that is what it would be if she was trafficked?


Call it what it is, rape.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 16, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Call it what it is, rape.


Yep, 100%. And given that's what it is, that Giuffre is accusing him of rape, I hope Maitliss pressed him as to why he isn't taking action against her to, ahem, clear his name.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 16, 2019)

Not sure if I can stomach watching the full programme, but it will be interesting to see the context of his 'honourable thing to do' claim. One reading of the phrase is that he had a lingering loyalty to Epstein, but presumably he's using it in the sense of 'I went over there to tell him what I thought and that our relationship was over'. But that line isn't going to work as, from memory, the walk in the park wasn't their final meeting in 2010.

I think it's a fair guess that, justice wise, this goes absolutely nowhere and he just ends up a semi retired royal, grubbing out corrupt money wherever he can. Same time, 'friends of Andrew' were playing up his 'playboy image' and that he's had over a 100 relationships (as part of the PR battle a few weeks ago).  Not impossible that a number of these 'relationships' were, shall we say, _arranged _for him by various hosts.  There may be more to come.

Realise it's not exactly fair to extrapolate from one set of allegations that there may be more to come. But it feels like a necessary corrective in the case of the royals. In part, the media report their every move, whilst sticking other stuff in the safe. There's still a pact between royals and press.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 16, 2019)

I think by honourable he means honourable to his friends, which if that means remaining mates with a nonce because he's stood you a few charter flights and supplied you with stuff, perhaps like young women and cocaine, makes you an utter cunt


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 16, 2019)

Buckaroo said:


> Dershowitz was on radio this morning saying he was the real victim of false accusations and he was proud of keeping Epstein out of jail, job well done. Said he went round to Epstein's for massage by professional massage therapists who were all age 40-50. Said he brought his wife with him.


He's a real shit, Dershowitz


----------



## brogdale (Nov 16, 2019)

Jesus.


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 16, 2019)

There's not enough popcorn in the world for this.  (it's on the net as well, they're putting it everyplace live)


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 16, 2019)

"That photograph was taken upstairs in that house...I've never been upstairs in that house."


----------



## Calamity1971 (Nov 16, 2019)

I like the fact that he's only started sweating again recently. 
"I couldn't sweat then because of andrenalin in the forces" 
Sweating now ya twat.


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 16, 2019)

"I can tell you categorically I don't remember..."


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 16, 2019)

Calamity1971 said:


> I like the fact that he's only started sweating again recently.
> "I couldn't sweat then because of andrenalin in the forces"
> Sweating now ya twat.


Very recently...tonight in fact.  The tv make-up is giving way.


----------



## elbows (Nov 16, 2019)




----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 16, 2019)

"Would you testify under oath?"

"I'd take legal advice (cough/choke) then if they said so then I'd testify"

Fuckin hell.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 16, 2019)

Unbecoming


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 16, 2019)

"Unbecoming"  That'll be a thing.

e2a snap


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 16, 2019)




----------



## Duncan2 (Nov 16, 2019)

Why did he do that?


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 16, 2019)

Haven't really been following this at all, but seems like half my Twitter timeline are.

They are sceptical.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 16, 2019)

It was quite something to see a journo asking those questions and showing signs of not believing a word. Same time I thought the whole thing was fucking cowardly. All she really did was ask the questions in the public domain. Questions like 'did you have sex with anyone on that visit', 'have you ever had sex with anyone 'provided' by a host' and 'why the fuck were you having massages at epstein's Florida apartment' would have been a start. Oh, and 'how about a lie detector test'?


----------



## Wilf (Nov 16, 2019)

Body language wise, he was shifty as fuck (to say the least). Like someone who had passed all the PR tests and (technically) knew how to spin a story, but couldn't let his underlying scummy nature shine through. Fucking liar.


----------



## eatmorecheese (Nov 16, 2019)

Came across as an entitled, squirming shit. Unbecoming.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 16, 2019)

When people tell lies they blink a lot. Did Randy Andy blink much? I only caught the last 5 minutes of the blink-fest...


----------



## Wilf (Nov 16, 2019)

Pizza Express, Woking: By Royal Appointment Alibi.


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 16, 2019)

Check google reviews for pizza express woking 

pizza express woking reviews - Google Search,,,

sort by newest


----------



## neonwilderness (Nov 16, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> When people tell lies they blink a lot. Did Randy Andy blink much? I only caught the last 5 minutes of the blink-fest...


“What’s he doing with his eyes?”


----------



## seeformiles (Nov 16, 2019)

Any possibility he’ll do a Edward VIII and go into exile after this unconvincing performance?


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 16, 2019)

seeformiles said:


> Any possibility he’ll do a Edward VIII and go into exile after this unconvincing performance?


More likely a car trip through Paris.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 16, 2019)

Can experiencing trauma (or 'overdosing on adrenaline') prevent sweating? I mean I'd assume there must be some foundation to this claim because there has presumably been a lot of coaching prior to this interview, also presumably delivered by experts, and I know the reverse is true (people sweating when anxious or nervous) but not sweating, even when hot, seems a weird physiological consequence to a pychological trauma. Surely an inability to sweat would result in organ failure, or perhaps resorting to panting like a dog


----------



## elbows (Nov 16, 2019)

Uncanny similarity in the quality of lies.


----------



## clicker (Nov 16, 2019)

The only thing missing from that performance, were jazz hands as the credits rolled.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 16, 2019)

neonwilderness said:


> “What’s he doing with his eyes?”


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Nov 16, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> When people tell lies they blink a lot. Did Randy Andy blink much? I only caught the last 5 minutes of the blink-fest...



Dunno, but my eyebrows shot off the top of my head and now are somewhere mid-back


----------



## Duncan2 (Nov 16, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Can experiencing trauma (or 'overdosing on adrenaline') prevent sweating? I mean I'd assume there must be some foundation to this claim because there has presumably been a lot of coaching prior to this interview, also presumably delivered by experts, and I know the reverse is true (people sweating when anxious or nervous) but not sweating, even when hot, seems a weird physiological consequence to a pychological trauma. Surely an inability to sweat would result in organ failure, or perhaps resorting to panting like a dog
> absolute bollocks no doubt but he got to mention the Falklands.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Nov 16, 2019)

"at the time I was accused of child abuse, I was the patron of an NSPCC campaign against... oh hold on"


----------



## Wilf (Nov 16, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Can experiencing trauma (or 'overdosing on adrenaline') prevent sweating? I mean I'd assume there must be some foundation to this claim because there has presumably been a lot of coaching prior to this interview, also presumably delivered by experts, and I know the reverse is true (people sweating when anxious or nervous) but not sweating, even when hot, seems a weird physiological consequence to a pychological trauma. Surely an inability to sweat would result in organ failure, or perhaps resorting to panting like a dog


Maybe there will be a new line of medical conditions, tailored to provide legal defences: 
I couldn't have shot that bloke in Barnsley because I have a genetic condition that stops me entering South Yorkshire.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 16, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Maybe there will be a new line of medical conditions, tailored to provide legal defences:
> I couldn't have shot that bloke in Barnsley because I have a genetic condition that stops me entering South Yorkshire.


I could not have shot that family due to itchy trigger finger as a decade of football hooliganism has left me unable to itch, also I was at a KFC in Reading


----------



## Duncan2 (Nov 16, 2019)

Very unwise of Brenda to let him give that interview from the palace.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 16, 2019)

Must admit, by now I'd have expected a royal protection officer popping up to say, 'oh, no, I've checked the logs and I was with him that night',, or some other 'official' material to disprove Giuffre's claims. Without getting too far into CTs, it would have been quite easy for them to produce and/or manufacture such 'evidence'. Wonder why that hasn't happened? The old bill not wanting to get drawn in? Too much of a high risk strategy if something else comes out proving he was at Tramp that night?


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 16, 2019)

I had a temporary medical condition that caused me never to sweat on Tuesdays. Thankfully I’ve been cured. As you can tell on this film.


----------



## elbows (Nov 16, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Maybe there will be a new line of medical conditions, tailored to provide legal defences:
> I couldn't have shot that bloke in Barnsley because I have a genetic condition that stops me entering South Yorkshire.



I'm sure more than one journalist is out there now, doing rudimentary research into whether a post traumatic sweat disorder or a prince talking shit disorder is more likely.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I had a temporary medical condition that caused me never to sweat on Tuesdays. Thankfully I’ve been cured. As you can tell on this film.


No Sweat – No Sweat is a grassroots anti-sweatshop campaign that works in solidarity with independent trade unions around the world. Our wholesale ethical t-shirts business is a not-for-profit company
If they ever require a patron...


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 16, 2019)

elbows said:


> I'm sure more than one journalist is out there now, doing rudimentary research into whether a post traumatic sweat disorder or a prince talking shit disorder is more likely.


Such a princely bearing.

Confidence, body language, eye-contact, control...

/taps machine


----------



## Duncan2 (Nov 16, 2019)

Wilf said:


> No Sweat – No Sweat is a grassroots anti-sweatshop campaign that works in solidarity with independent trade unions around the world. Our wholesale ethical t-shirts business is a not-for-profit company
> If they ever require a patron...


Not sure they would want him now.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 16, 2019)

Wonder if he had a discount code, pizza express could just check the records for the one customer who paid full whack


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 16, 2019)

elbows said:


> I'm sure more than one journalist is out there now, doing rudimentary research into whether a post traumatic sweat disorder or a prince talking shit disorder is more likely.


Doesn't need a journalist though.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 16, 2019)

Duncan2 said:


> Not sure they would want him now.


Perhaps Paco Rabanne will use him in their Christmas advertising campaign?

Or maybe he'll get one of those Channel 5 Embarrassing Bodies episodes: '1982: The Day I Stopped Sweating ... Until i Started Sweating Again Later On'.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Nov 16, 2019)

Duncan2 said:


> Very unwise of Brenda to let him give that interview from the palace.



Sacrificial lamb.


----------



## Duncan2 (Nov 16, 2019)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Sacrificial lamb.


that's what dexter thinks too.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Nov 16, 2019)

Duncan2 said:


> that's what dexter thinks too.



??


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 16, 2019)

Duncan2 said:


> that's what dexter thinks too.


what?  the Paris thing was a joke...they'd never kill their own


----------



## Duncan2 (Nov 16, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> what?  the Paris thing was a joke...they'd never kill their own


ok


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Nov 16, 2019)

Honestly, were I the PR person here, I'd have gone with the "Sorry, I was coked out my mind at the time".


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Nov 16, 2019)




----------



## Wilf (Nov 16, 2019)

Quite liked the bit about not being aware of all the people walking round at epstein's pedo mansion: 'Oh, we have loads of servants wandering round at home. I assumed they were just his servants. Who notices servants?'


----------



## Wilf (Nov 16, 2019)

The depressing thing is that whilst we'll see a few charities/'causes' quietly dropping him, the chiselling cunt will still find a way to rake it in. And on that point, Maitliss was remiss in not pursuing the issue of why epstein gave his ex wife 15 grand.


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 16, 2019)

It was 4 days.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Nov 16, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Quite liked the bit about not being aware of all the people walking round at epstein's pedo mansion: 'Oh, we have loads of servants wandering round at home. I assumed they were just his servants. Who notices servants?'



I mean WTAF. Maitlis wades in with "You wouldn't notice underage girls wandering around Buckingham Palace?"


----------



## Hollis (Nov 16, 2019)

The sweating thing is a perfectly possible medical condition..
Anhidrosis: Treatments, causes, symptoms, and home remedies


----------



## Wilf (Nov 16, 2019)

Hollis said:


> The sweating thing is a perfectly possible medical condition..
> Anhidrosis: Treatments, causes, symptoms, and home remedies


Seems that people with that condition need to avoid hot climates because of the risk of heat stroke. AFAIK, quite wisely, Windsor rarely travelled abroad and would certainly have avoided going to places like the American Virgin Islands. Could have been fatal.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Nov 16, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Seems that people with that condition need to avoid hot climates because of the risk of heat stroke. AFAIK, quite wisely, Windsor rarely travelled abroad and would certainly have avoided going to places like the American Virgin Islands. Could have been fatal.



Definitely no chillies on that remarkably memorable pizza in Woking!


----------



## Wilf (Nov 16, 2019)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Definitely no chillies on that remarkably memorable pizza in Woking!


'Couldn't believe it, you could have extra toppings and it came on a plate as well. Pretty sure it came with knives and forks, but the Duchess chose to eat it with her fingers! I thought wow, I'll never forget that pizza as long as I .... have awkward questions to answer'.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Nov 16, 2019)

Wilf said:


> 'Couldn't believe it, you could have extra toppings and it came on a plate as well. Pretty sure it came with knives and forks, but the Duchess chose to eat it with her fingers! I thought wow, I'll never forget that pizza as long as I .... have awkward questions to answer'.



No Wilf, you haven't remembered the remarkable memories *at all*. The Duchess was away, you see, but a conveniently very young daughter was there!


----------



## Hollis (Nov 16, 2019)

Quite an amusing thread on twitter:


----------



## elbows (Nov 16, 2019)

Hollis said:


> The sweating thing is a perfectly possible medical condition..
> Anhidrosis: Treatments, causes, symptoms, and home remedies



And yet he could swear he never met Anne Hidro or her sister.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 16, 2019)

Hollis said:


> The sweating thing is a perfectly possible medical condition..
> Anhidrosis: Treatments, causes, symptoms, and home remedies


See I knew there must be some medical basis for it or he wouldn't have come out with something so ridiculous. Although I note the possible causes in that piece are all physiological or side effect of specific drugs, not pychological


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 16, 2019)

Anyway of the whole interview, this is the weirdest and most outstanding bit imo


----------



## Duncan2 (Nov 16, 2019)

Might be quite instructive to see what the Sunday papers say.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 16, 2019)

And this bit is quite grim when you think of the implications of what he's saying


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 16, 2019)

"That's a bit strange"...


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 16, 2019)

Duncan2 said:


> Might be quite instructive to see what the Sunday papers say.


The observer's take High-stakes gamble on TV interview over Epstein backfires on Duke of York


----------



## steveo87 (Nov 17, 2019)

Hollis said:


> The sweating thing is a perfectly possible medical condition..
> Anhidrosis: Treatments, causes, symptoms, and home remedies


Also: a lizard.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 17, 2019)

Perhaps it's time Andrew let someone else kick him as his kicking himself clearly hasn't worked


----------



## Wilf (Nov 17, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Anyway of the whole interview, this is the weirdest and most outstanding bit imo


TBH, if I need a place to stay in Leeds, Jimmy Saville's place always seems convenient.. in fact, last time I stayed I only saw him fleetingly at the dinner he'd called in my honour.


----------



## Humberto (Nov 17, 2019)

Jimmy Savile must be turning in his grave.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 17, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> And this bit is quite grim when you think of the implications of what he's saying


A weird formulation and certainly grim. And by that logic, women have less reason to remember a sexual encounter. Astonishing insight into his 'mind'. He's basically an incel who isn't celibate.


----------



## UrbaneFox (Nov 17, 2019)

A truly sinister part was his friendship with Ghislaine Maxwell, whose fortune and Belgravia house came from her brilliant career as Robert Maxwell's daughter.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 17, 2019)

Wilf said:


> A weird formulation and certainly grim. And by that logic, women have less reason to remember a sexual encounter. Astonishing insight into his 'mind'. He's basically an incel who isn't celibate.


It's a horrible subtext. For women, sex is passive and therefore experiences are easy to forget.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 17, 2019)

UrbaneFox said:


> A truly sinister part was his friendship with Ghislaine Maxwell, whose fortune and Belgravia house came from her brilliant career as Robert Maxwell's daughter.


Couple of pages ago I suggested Maitliss/the bbc were shithouses, not going in on the details of his trips to pedo Island etc. I suspect there were a several packs of lawyers watching on, including Maxwell's. She featured several times but they didn't go into her wider procurement role. Maybe they just chose to focus on him, thinking that spearing a royal was the better story. Personally though, I'd like to have seen more background about Epstein's wider rape/trafficking industry. In turn, setting that in place would have made his denials even more unbelieveable.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Nov 17, 2019)

> Charlie Proctor, editor of the Royal Central website, said: “I expected a train wreck. That was a plane crashing into an oil tanker, causing a tsunami, triggering a nuclear explosion level bad.”



High-stakes gamble on TV interview over Epstein backfires on Duke of York


----------



## Weller (Nov 17, 2019)

Sky Australia I often tune in as I like their sense of humor


----------



## UrbaneFox (Nov 17, 2019)

He's just a freeloader who enjoyed Epstein's largesse. I doubt he did any more than that. He's spent his entire life getting what he wants, and someone else always pays.

Reluctantly, his 'sense of honour' meant he felt compelled to travel to Manhattan for a few days in order to tell Epstein that they should not be seen together. I doubt he went to such trouble for all other friendships that have fizzled out, but hey, billionaires are something else.

He and his grabbing wife were a good match. If sponging was an olympic event they would be gold medalists.


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 17, 2019)

Just saw some of today’s Sunday paper headlines reporting the Prince Andrew interview and they all seem lockstep scathing by his apparent lack of remorse.

Some of his excuses are it couldn’t have been him having sex with the 17yr old as he doesn’t sweat and he was in Pizza Express at the time of the allegation 

Prince Andrew 'squirms' in 'bombshell' interview


----------



## rekil (Nov 17, 2019)

yesterday said:
			
		

> I mean you have to understand that his house, I described it more as almost as a railway station if you know what I mean in the sense that there were people coming in and out of that house all the time.






			
				today said:
			
		

> If anyone chose to perceive that I compared a house full of trafficked teenage girls and wealthy perverts to a railway station then that is more illustrative of their character than mine I'm afraid.


----------



## Poi E (Nov 17, 2019)

Does this bring us closer to hanging Elizabeth Windsor for crimes against humanity?


----------



## Badgers (Nov 17, 2019)

Who will play him in the Crown telly series?


----------



## brogdale (Nov 17, 2019)




----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 17, 2019)

Weller said:


> Sky Australia I often tune in as I like their sense of humor


Why does the footage of the interview look like something a teenager shot on their iPhone? 


UrbaneFox said:


> He's just a freeloader


Comes with the job.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 17, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Who will play him in the Crown telly series?


Whoever picks the short straw


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 17, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Does this bring us closer to hanging Elizabeth Windsor for crimes against humanity?


No, she'll be beheaded


----------



## TopCat (Nov 17, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> No, she'll be beheaded


Yeah for fucks sake let's get this stapled down now.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 17, 2019)

Great this morning to see the news and watch the story roll out. No support from pals or acquaintances.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 17, 2019)

Not far from Woking and quite fancy a pizza


----------



## TopCat (Nov 17, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Not far from Woking and quite fancy a pizza


Graff the loo please.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 17, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Who will play him in the Crown telly series?



Chris Langham.


----------



## neonwilderness (Nov 17, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Not far from Woking and quite fancy a pizza


American Hot?


----------



## Badgers (Nov 17, 2019)




----------



## neonwilderness (Nov 17, 2019)




----------



## Voley (Nov 17, 2019)




----------



## Manter (Nov 17, 2019)

Wilf said:


> In terms of legal action, the UK police could presumably only interview him about sex with/rape of* the woman in London. Or possibly sex tourism legislation for the nonce island stuff?  Otherwise it's up to US authorities calling on him as a witness.
> 
> * Let's add the word 'alleged', but that is what it would be if she was trafficked?


UK courts can prosecute sexual crimes committed abroad to or by British nationals


----------



## MickiQ (Nov 17, 2019)

He is clearly getting


Badgers said:


> Who will play him in the Crown telly series?


What happens when the Crown reaches the point where this comes up? Especially if this is still running? 
Are they going to pretend the Queen only has 3 children and give his lines to Eddie?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 17, 2019)

One point of law; sex with a 17 year old is not illegal in the UK. Sex for money, prostitution, is also not illegal in the UK. Sex with a prostitute who is under 18 is illegal in the UK. That’s before you get to the trafficking aspect of this.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 17, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> One point of law; sex with a 17 year old is not illegal in the UK. Sex for money, prostitution, is also not illegal in the UK. Sex with a prostitute who is under 18 is illegal in the UK. That’s before you get to the trafficking aspect of this.


Yeh but sex with someone without their consent is rape. And that's really what we're dealing with here


----------



## tim (Nov 17, 2019)

UrbaneFox said:


> He's just a freeloader who enjoyed Epstein's largesse. I doubt he did any more than that. He's spent his entire life getting what he wants, and someone else always pays.



Even if what he wants is a Sloppy Americano at Pizza Express Woking


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 17, 2019)

tim said:


> Even if what he wants is a Sloppy Americano at Pizza Express Woking


Sloppy giuseppe


----------



## kenny g (Nov 17, 2019)

Just watched most of the interview. The man is not telling the truth. Probably thinks that because he has spent most of his life getting away with lying to the Queen he will get away with doing the same with the rest of us. All the signs of bullshit are there - small smiles - rehearsed sincerity - self pity at having to tell untruths. Wouldn't be surprised if   he ends up doing an Epstein himself.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 17, 2019)

I had andrew and sarah ferguson as the world's most gruesome, chiselling, shitty twat couple. Turns out their commitment to family life meant that every time one went out, the other stayed in with the kids. Who'd have known they were such wonderful parents?

So, never both out at the same time?


----------



## agricola (Nov 17, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Sloppy giuseppe



well thats me never eating at a Pizza Express again


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 17, 2019)

agricola said:


> well thats me never eating at a Pizza Express again


Soon you won't have to even think about it as pe sinks under a sea of debt


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 17, 2019)

kenny g said:


> Just watched most of the interview. The man is not telling the truth. Probably thinks that because he has spent most of his life getting away with lying to the Queen he will get away with doing the same with the rest of us.


Not particularly a dig at you, but why do you assume the queen is any better than her sprogs when it comes to either intelligence or morality?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 17, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Not particularly a dig at you, but why do you assume the queen is any better than her sprogs when it comes to either intelligence or morality?


She has learned the wisdom of silence


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Nov 17, 2019)

Only saw the tail end of the interview. 
He came across as thick as two short planks.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 17, 2019)

sorry - not au fait with all the details of this grimly gripping drama - what the fuck is the "cant sweat" thing about? why did he come out with that?


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 17, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> sorry - not au fait with all the details of this grimly gripping drama - what the fuck is the "cant sweat" thing about? why did he come out with that?


Witness testimony is that he was sweaty.  His response: not me then; I had post traumatic sweat disorder at the time.  I'm cured now.


----------



## andysays (Nov 17, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Witness testimony is that he was sweaty.  His response: not me then; I had *post traumatic sweat disorder* at the time.  I'm cured now.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 17, 2019)

Prince Andrew wasn't really mates with
Epstein
And he
Doesn't sweat or drink
Or go to island sex parties, he eats in
Pizza Express, american hot romano with extra
Halapenos
In Woking, this isn't a
Lie, the photo probably is, he just doesn't have the
Evidence


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 17, 2019)

Fucks sake I spent paedophile wrong


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 17, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Fucks sake I spent paedophile wrong


You spelt spelt wrong


----------



## JimW (Nov 17, 2019)

I was sweating like a royal in a Manhattan peado hideout


----------



## Miss-Shelf (Nov 17, 2019)

Would anyone be interested and willing to provide a short outline of this whole sordid business?   I know literally nothing and am too lazy to read up about it


----------



## Thora (Nov 17, 2019)

Miss-Shelf said:


> Would anyone be interested and willing to provide a short outline of this whole sordid business?   I know literally nothing and am too lazy to read up about it


Jeffery Epstein was a convicted sex offender who groomed/trafficked/raped teenage girls and had them provide massages/sex to his rich old man friends.
Prince Andrew was one of Epstein's mates who stayed at his home/on his island/flew in his private plane.
One of the child victims claims Andrew was one of Epstein's rich old man friends that had sex with her and she has a photo of them together at Epstein's house.
Andrew claims it wasn't him, the photo's fake and he only hung out with his convicted paedo mate because he's an honourable chap and he definitely wasn't the sweaty creep who had sex with a child sex slave because he doesn't sweat and he was in Woking Pizza Express that night anyway.


----------



## pseudonarcissus (Nov 17, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Fucks sake I spent paedophile wrong


And jalapeño, but don’t sweat it


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Nov 17, 2019)

neonwilderness said:


> American Hot?
> 
> View attachment 190197



Chicken Royal


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 17, 2019)

pseudonarcissus said:


> And jalapeño, but don’t sweat it


I did that one phonetically, and because I couldn't think of a H word


----------



## Sue (Nov 17, 2019)

Thora said:


> Jeffery Epstein was a convicted sex offender who groomed/trafficked/raped teenage girls and had them provide massages/sex to his rich old man friends.
> Prince Andrew was one of Epstein's mates who stayed at his home/on his island/flew in his private plane.
> One of the child victims claims Andrew was one of Epstein's rich old man friends that had sex with her and she has a photo of them together at Epstein's house.
> Andrew claims it wasn't him, the photo's fake and he only hung out with his convicted paedo mate because he's an honourable chap and he definitely wasn't the sweaty creep who had sex with a child sex slave *because he doesn't sweat* and he was in Woking Pizza Express that night anyway.


...because he got shot at in the Falklands. Like a hero or something. But now he can sweat again. It definitely wasn't him though. Doesn't even remember her in fact. I was pretty convinced really.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 17, 2019)

I think everyone is being very mean. He suffered from this debilitating condition for more than two decades following his overdose of adrenaline during the Falklands War. Just think of all those military parades he's had to suffer through in full uniform without a drop of sweat to keep him cool. Really, show some compassion. 

IT WAS THE FALKLANDS. YOU WEREN'T THERE, MAN.


----------



## extra dry (Nov 17, 2019)

Shawn Attwood, covers a lot of the background


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 17, 2019)

Pity the Argentines missed the cunt.


----------



## Manter (Nov 17, 2019)

Thora said:


> Jeffery Epstein was a convicted sex offender who groomed/trafficked/raped teenage girls and had them provide massages/sex to his rich old man friends.
> Prince Andrew was one of Epstein's mates who stayed at his home/on his island/flew in his private plane.
> One of the child victims claims Andrew was one of Epstein's rich old man friends that had sex with her and she has a photo of them together at Epstein's house.
> Andrew claims it wasn't him, the photo's fake and he only hung out with his convicted paedo mate because he's an honourable chap and he definitely wasn't the sweaty creep who had sex with a child sex slave because he doesn't sweat and he was in Woking Pizza Express that night anyway.


This is one of the best summaries I’ve read actually...


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 17, 2019)

Thora said:


> Jeffery Epstein was a convicted sex offender who groomed/trafficked/raped teenage girls and had them provide massages/sex to his rich old man friends.
> Prince Andrew was one of Epstein's mates who stayed at his home/on his island/flew in his private plane.
> One of the child victims claims Andrew was one of Epstein's rich old man friends that had sex with her and she has a photo of them together at Epstein's house.
> Andrew claims it wasn't him, the photo's fake and he only hung out with his convicted paedo mate because he's an honourable chap and he definitely wasn't the sweaty creep who had sex with a child sex slave because he doesn't sweat and he was in Woking Pizza Express that night anyway.


Only one correction: the picture of Andrew and giuffre taken at ghislane maxwell's place in london


----------



## Duncan2 (Nov 17, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Only one correction: the picture of Andrew and giuffre taken at ghislane maxwell's place in london


only it couldn't have been Andrew cos despite knowing Ghislaine since uni he had never been upstairs in her Belgravia house.As he put it" the dining table and everything" were downstairs.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 17, 2019)

Duncan2 said:


> only it couldn't have been Andrew cos despite knowing Ghislaine since uni he had never been upstairs in her Belgravia house.As he put it" the dining table and everything" were downstairs.


Can't have known gm since uni as he didn't attend one


----------



## maomao (Nov 17, 2019)

He really does come across as extremely thick doesn't he. I still don't get what he means by honourable at all. I sort of suspect he's saying that at least by staying at a convicted paedophile sex trafficker's flat  he wasn't spending public money on a luxury hotel.

Mostly the royals avoid this kind of nonsense by never commenting and not giving interviews. I think they'll be doubling down on that policy in future. Silly paedo cunt.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 17, 2019)

maomao said:


> He really does come across as extremely thick doesn't he. I still don't get what he means by honourable at all. I sort of suspect he's saying that at least by staying at a convicted paedophile sex trafficker's flat  he wasn't spending public money on a luxury hotel.
> .


Personally, I would doubt he ever has saving public money at the top of his mind, even as something to use as an excuse. I think he means keeping his word to Epstein or something similar. He's lying anyway, and he's thick, so probably he doesn't actually know what he means by that, he just thought 'honourable is a good word, need to get it in there, oh and _note to self_ don't forget to mention the Falklands'.


----------



## teqniq (Nov 17, 2019)

I was thinking of offering him a shovel but it appears he has no need of one.


----------



## tim (Nov 17, 2019)

He spends too much time with Central Asian tyrants and oligarchs to be considered an honourable man.


----------



## maomao (Nov 17, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Personally, I would doubt he ever has saving public money at the top of his mind, even as something to use as an excuse. I think he means keeping his word to Epstein or something similar. He's lying anyway, and he's thick, so probably he doesn't actually know what he means by that, he just thought 'honourable is a good word, need to get it in there, oh and _note to self_ don't forget to mention the Falklands'.


Like I said, I haven't really got a clue what he thinks he means. The only thing I'm sure about that I wasn't yesterday is his guilt.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 17, 2019)

tim said:


> He spends too much time with Central Asian tyrants and oligarchs to be considered an honourable man.


Now then. He does that _for us_ in his tireless role as roving business envoy. Nothing more honourable than to sacrifice oneself for one's country. And remember, _he was shot at_ in the Falklands. 

_Honourable_ and _Falklands_, now can we just leave this now???


----------



## steveo87 (Nov 17, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Pity the Argentines missed the cunt.




For now....


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 17, 2019)

maomao said:


> He really does come across as extremely thick doesn't he. I still don't get what he means by honourable at all. I sort of suspect he's saying that at least by staying at a convicted paedophile sex trafficker's flat  he wasn't spending public money on a luxury hotel.
> 
> Mostly the royals avoid this kind of nonsense by never commenting and not giving interviews. I think they'll be doubling down on that policy in future. Silly paedo cunt.



Afaik the honourable thing was he decided he must cut off contact with the paed, but rather than via a phone call, text message, What’s App, he decided the honourable thing to do would be to fly to New York and stay at the nonce’s house for nearly a week. That’s the best way to sever contact. With someone you’ve not seen in four years...


----------



## Celyn (Nov 17, 2019)

Honourable and Falklands and devoted family man.


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Nov 17, 2019)

Lupa said:


> He came across as thick as two short planks.


No doubt linked to the inbreeding among the aristocracy over the centuries.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 17, 2019)

Celyn said:


> Honourable and Falklands and devoted family man.


Exactly. and people are saying he messed the interview up.


----------



## pogofish (Nov 17, 2019)

Interesting - Sitting in a cafe up Deeside and a little while ago, one of the fellow customers (local poshos) piped up that Prince Andrew had just registered on her Facebook as "nearby". How near do you have to be for this feature to work? The main road is just a few hundred yards away.  

So it looks like he's been banished back to Balmoral - which he seems to have spent a lot of time this year.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 17, 2019)

pogofish said:


> Interesting - Sitting in a cafe up Deeside and a little while ago, one of the fellow customers (local poshos) piped up that Prince Andrew had just registered on her Facebook as "nearby". How near do you have to be for this feature to work? The main road is just a few hundred yards away.
> 
> So it looks like he's been banished back to Balmoral - which he seems to have spent a lot of time this year.


Where’s the nearest Pizza Express to Ballater?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 17, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Afaik the honourable thing was he decided he must cut off contact with the paed, but rather than via a phone call, text message, What’s App, he decided the honourable thing to do would be to fly to New York and stay at the nonce’s house for nearly a week. That’s the best way to sever contact. With someone you’ve not seen in four years...



And despite staying in his house for five days or whatever, the only opportunity old andy had to sever the  friendship with the nonce was while in the park, very unfortunate that literally at the moment he said we can't be friends (not out of moral objection but I'm a prince you see) somebody took a photo, rotten luck really


----------



## maomao (Nov 17, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Where’s the nearest Pizza Express to Ballater?


47 miles away in Aberdeen. Probably outside of their delivery radius.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 17, 2019)

lets hope there is room for a little one on the transportation super liner to the south atlantic project. he can regale his fellow deportees with tales of falklands chopper based derring  do's during those long scurvy puncuated months of darkness


----------



## Lorca (Nov 17, 2019)

extra dry said:


> Shawn Attwood, covers a lot of the background




Alas, Shaun attwood seems to be disappearing down conspiracy theory rabbit holes. He also interviewed and seems quite pally with frank portinari, so would be wary of putting too much stock in what he says.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 17, 2019)

maomao said:


> 47 miles away in Aberdeen. Probably outside of their delivery radius.


I’m not au fait with the Facebook function “Facebook friend nearby”, though. Would it kick in in a Ballater cafe if Andrew walked into the Union Street Pizza Express?


----------



## rekil (Nov 17, 2019)

Never heard of him but I see his channel is full of Icke videos. No thankyou.


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 17, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> One point of law; sex with a 17 year old is not illegal in the UK. Sex for money, prostitution, is also not illegal in the UK. Sex with a prostitute who is under 18 is illegal in the UK. That’s before you get to the trafficking aspect of this.



Do you know what the law is in America?

Probably/definitely hypothetical tho as nothing will happen with him being a royal.


----------



## andysays (Nov 17, 2019)

maomao said:


> Mostly the royals avoid this kind of nonsense by never commenting and not giving interviews. I think they'll be doubling down on that policy in future. Silly paedo cunt.


Seems to be widespread amazement that he agreed to the interview in the first place

Prince Andrew criticised for 'car-crash' BBC Newsnight interview


> Prince Andrew has faced widespread criticism for doing a BBC interview, described as "a car-crash and a disaster". Royal experts and others queried his decision to talk about his links with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.





> Former Buckingham Palace press officer Dickie Arbiter described the interview as "excruciating".
> The BBC's royal correspondent Jonny Dymond said the prince was "very damaged. The interview was an opportunity to clear his name and rescue his reputation. It has failed, badly."





> Asked about the prince's decision to be interviewed by BBC Newsnight's Emily Maitlis, Mr Arbiter said he thought many questions would be asked in Buckingham Palace. He said: "They will be wondering: Was this the right decision? Was the right decision made? Who made the decision to put him on? Did he make it himself or did he seek advice within the Palace?





> "My guess is that he bulldozed his way in and decided he was going to do it himself without any advice. Any sensible-thinking person in the PR business would have thrown their hands up in horror at the very suggestion that he puts himself up in front of a television camera to explain away his actions and his friendship with Jeffrey Epstein."


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 17, 2019)

andysays said:


> Seems to be widespread amazement that he agreed to the interview in the first place
> Prince Andrew criticised for 'car-crash' BBC Newsnight interview


We will just let him walk to the guillotine, he seeks his own execution this one


----------



## Manter (Nov 17, 2019)

Even the express seemed incredulous (my FIL buys it)


----------



## tim (Nov 17, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Do you know what the law is in America?
> 
> Probably/definitely hypothetical tho as nothing will happen with him being a royal.



And the fact that the the US authorities would have to go for Bill Clinton and Donald Trump at the same time.


----------



## tim (Nov 17, 2019)

pogofish said:


> So it looks like he's been banished back to Balmoral - which he seems to have spent a lot of time this year.



Locking him up in Balmoral and Philip in a cottage somewhere on the Sandringham estate, it would appear that the Royals are following the Saudi example of disappearing and detaining embarrassing family members. I'm sure that Charles thinks that a couple of vats of Malmsey would come in useful at this juncture.


----------



## teqniq (Nov 17, 2019)

You'd think maybe, just maybe there might be one person who had something good to say about him but judging by the comments underneath this tweet he has been universaly loathed by anyone who had dealings with him.


----------



## friedaweed (Nov 17, 2019)

Just watched it. He kind of reminded me of all the times my children have lied to me and I've just gone along with it to see how much their imagination has grown. 

Guilty as fuck.


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 17, 2019)

copliker said:


> Never heard of him but I see his channel is full of Icke videos. No thankyou.



David Icke has some quite interesting content tbf.

Or is Icke a far right extremist too?


----------



## teqniq (Nov 17, 2019)

Seriously?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 17, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> lets hope there is room for a little one on the transportation super liner to the south atlantic project. he can regale his fellow deportees with tales of falklands chopper based derring  do's during those long scurvy puncuated months of darkness


He will fulfil a very important role in the draining of Falkland sound


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 17, 2019)

teqniq said:


> View attachment 190234
> 
> You'd think maybe, just maybe there might be one person who had something good to say about him but judging by the comments underneath this tweet he has been universaly loathed by anyone who had dealings with him.


Even his mother despises him, and she desired nothing more than the rest of the country share her contempt for this odious turd - hence her consent for this interview


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 17, 2019)

Slipped up there Marty1 . Bad troll.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 17, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> David Icke has some quite interesting content tbf.
> 
> Or is Icke a far right extremist too?


Which bits are interesting?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 17, 2019)

Well after that "you couldn't make it up" self owning car crash of an interview I cant see him being allowed to appear in public ever again, he'll get heckled to fuck. Cant see anyone wanting to publicly associate with him either. nonceing cunt.


----------



## Duncan2 (Nov 17, 2019)

Whilst the chain of recent events does point towards a likely future in the South Atlantic in the near term could we swap him for Anne Sacoolas?


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 17, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Which bits are interesting?



The bits where he isn’t talking about Saturn transmitting mind frequencies and reptilians.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 17, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Or is Icke a far right extremist too?


Yes.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 17, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> The bits where he isn’t talking about Saturn transmitting mind frequencies and reptilians.


Ahhh, you mean the bits about how Jews are behind everything. You've blown it, needed to be more subtle.


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 17, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Ahhh, you mean the bits about how Jews are behind everything. You've blown it, needed to be more subtle.



No.


----------



## Ted Striker (Nov 17, 2019)

This is phenomenal TV, tbf. Up there with the Bros doc from last year*

Haven't seen anyone so bold and unaware of their own stupidity since someone from the Tory front bench said anything. Boris must be loving him taking up the headlines (and normalising his cabinet) over this.

(*credit to Iain Lee on twitter for the Bros comparison)


----------



## editor (Nov 17, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> David Icke has some quite interesting content tbf.
> 
> Or is Icke a far right extremist too?


He's a fucking lunatic cunt. next question.


----------



## pogofish (Nov 17, 2019)

maomao said:


> 47 miles away in Aberdeen. Probably outside of their delivery radius.



Ex worked in one of them, the biggest names she had were Status Quo and an ITV newsreader.


----------



## tim (Nov 17, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> Cant see anyone wanting to publicly associate with him either. nonceing cunt.



He's still got true friends


----------



## agricola (Nov 17, 2019)

Ted Striker said:


> This is phenomenal TV, tbf. Up there with the Bros doc from last year*
> 
> Haven't seen anyone so bold and unaware of their own stupidity since someone from the Tory front bench said anything. *Boris must be loving him taking up the headlines (and normalising his cabinet) over this.*
> 
> (*credit to Iain Lee on twitter for the Bros comparison)



I don't think that interview was in order to help the Government, but deliberately organizing such a calamity as that interview could indicate that someone is trying to distract attention from something else (whether directly linked to Epstein or not).


----------



## maomao (Nov 17, 2019)

pogofish said:


> Ex worked in one of them, the biggest names she had were Status Quo and an ITV newsreader.


That sounds like an orgy no-one really wanted to go to.


----------



## pogofish (Nov 17, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Where’s the nearest Pizza Express to Ballater?



Thing is, the main road they use to get from the airport, to and from Balmoral was around a hundred yards from this cafe - and if they took the back road, which they sometimes do, it would be measured in feet!


----------



## pogofish (Nov 17, 2019)

maomao said:


> That sounds like an orgy no-one really wanted to go to.



She got bounced on the blonde ones knee and given backstage “VIP tickets” - which she promptly gave away to someone else.

They tipped very well and weren’t nearly as rapacious as some of the oil company parties she had to deal with in there, apparently.

Actually, Andy remains the only Royal of that generation that I’ve declined the opportunity to “host” at work. I will complete the set of the rest of them into the new year though.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 17, 2019)

Anhidrosic Flasher in the Woking Pizza Express- good HMHB songtitle.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Nov 17, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> David Icke has some quite interesting content tbf.
> 
> Or is Icke a far right extremist too?


LOL


----------



## sheothebudworths (Nov 17, 2019)

Celyn said:


> Honourable and Falklands and devoted family man.



Plus kids party at Pizza Express = _man of the people_ 

I took my daughter and two of her friends to Pizza Express for her birthday once. We went to the swimming pool first cos it's free for kids under 16 here - and then they got the bog standard kids meal deal, which I paid for with my Tesco reward vouchers (then inwardly cringed when I had to buy one of them a _second_ glass of coke - drinks not included with Tesco vouchers  - I can tell you I was fucking sweating then).


----------



## brogdale (Nov 17, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Which bits are interesting?


----------



## MrSki (Nov 17, 2019)




----------



## MickiQ (Nov 17, 2019)

I've sat and watched this video, it's fucking brilliant,  Car Crash doesn't do it justice. About 12 mins in she asks him about a party at Epsteins pad which he denied going to and then admitted it. 20 mins in he clearly and vividly remembers his visit to Piazza Express Woking which surely must be the greatest pizza place on Earth for him to remember it so clearly. 25 mins she gets to the photo and he just hums and haws and claims he doesn't remember. Maitlis  tries to draw him out and get him to say it's fake and he doesn't bite. He clearly knows its not and knows that saying so on camera only to be proven wrong later is going to look even worse.
He doesn't accuse Roberts of being a liar but just keeps harping on these things couldn't have happened because he couldn't remember.
Amazed that the poor woman didn't choke to death on the smell of burning pants.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 17, 2019)

I almost despise myself for thinking that there's a [sweaty] cheese crust joke in here somewhere...


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 17, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Which bits are interesting?



Looks like Icke has been following this scandal.

Prince Andrew - The Walls Are Closing In.

On his YouTube channel, published 20th August.

Haven’t watched it but may give it a go (providing he doesn’t meander into reptilians).

Anyway, here’s Prince Andrews full interview with Emily Maitlis.  I’ve only watched the first 12mins so far but he’s squirming already.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 17, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Looks like Icke has been following this scandal.
> 
> Prince Andrew - The Walls Are Closing In.
> 
> ...



Mods....please.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 17, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Looks like Icke has been following this scandal.


Why the fuck are you linking to this dangerous, antisemitic, far right enmeshed, energy-sapping, sense vacuum?


----------



## SpineyNorman (Nov 17, 2019)

Rothschild zionists probably


----------



## maomao (Nov 17, 2019)

Did Marty1 used to be someone else or is this a fresh meathead?


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 17, 2019)

maomao said:


> Did Marty1 used to be someone else or is this a fresh meathead?


I never know. But this faux innocent Icke promotion is the stuff of cunts.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 17, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Why the fuck are you linking to this dangerous, antisemitic, far right enmeshed, energy-sapping, sense vacuum?


Marty1 had run out of energy sapping power, one of his tubes is probably leaky. Normally I would suggest repair but best to chuck him in the bin with the UK’s other 5 million vacuum cleaners*

*stats on hoover wastage from Helen, the vacuum repair girl from Espares


----------



## Wilf (Nov 17, 2019)

Arid
Nonce
Denies
Royal
Epsteinism.
Wanker!

Edit: dang, beaten to it in #1298 by Proper Tidy!


----------



## Wilf (Nov 17, 2019)

JimW said:


> I was sweating like a royal in a Manhattan peado hideout



#Convenience


----------



## sheothebudworths (Nov 17, 2019)

'Are you saying she's lying?'
'That's a very difficult thing to answer because I'm not in a position to know what she's trying to achieve...' (minus lots of ums and ahs and errs).

The skanky cunt.

I'd _like_ to say it's great telly - but I can't imagine there's any joy to be taken from it for her. Massive props to her for seeing this through - I think I'd feel terrified, tbh.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 17, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I think everyone is being very mean. He suffered from this debilitating condition for more than two decades following his overdose of adrenaline during the Falklands War. Just think of all those military parades he's had to suffer through in full uniform without a drop of sweat to keep him cool. Really, show some compassion.
> 
> IT WAS THE FALKLANDS. YOU WEREN'T THERE, MAN.


That's not the full story. His full on Biggles Falklands helicoptering annoyed a South American evil spirit. It condemned him to blocked sweat glands for all eternity. The spell could only be broken by a journalist asking if he was a paedophile. Thankfully he's free of the curse now and is sweating like fuck.


----------



## kenny g (Nov 17, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Not particularly a dig at you, but why do you assume the queen is any better than her sprogs when it comes to either intelligence or morality?


Maybe having a different father helps? My point was that Andrew probably assumes that if she believes him anyone will. Since almost no one apart from Her Majesty and perhaps his ex wife do believe him this appears to be another 'error of judgement.'


----------



## kenny g (Nov 17, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Only saw the tail end of the interview.
> He came across as thick as two short planks.


Like some 60s comedy sketch.


----------



## UrbaneFox (Nov 17, 2019)

Thora said:


> Jeffery Epstein was a convicted sex offender who groomed/trafficked/raped teenage girls and had them provide massages/sex to his rich old man friends.
> Prince Andrew was one of Epstein's mates who stayed at his home/on his island/flew in his private plane.
> One of the child victims claims Andrew was one of Epstein's rich old man friends that had sex with her and she has a photo of them together at Epstein's house.
> Andrew claims it wasn't him, the photo's fake and he only hung out with his convicted paedo mate because he's an honourable chap and he definitely wasn't the sweaty creep who had sex with a child sex slave because he doesn't sweat and he was in Woking Pizza Express that night anyway.



He wasn't actually one of Epstein's friends. He was _Ghilaine Maxwell's_ friend, and Epstein was her Plus One.

I think he should do another interview to clarify this point, thus clearing the good family name.

Might be as well to deny that he ever met Epstein, and was never ever interviewed by Emily Maitlis last week.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 17, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Now then. He does that _for us_ in his tireless role as roving business envoy. Nothing more honourable than to sacrifice oneself for one's country. And remember, _he was shot at_ in the Falklands.
> 
> _Honourable_ and _Falklands_, now can we just leave this now???


Yeah, he's at the Mother Teresa end of the spectrum when it comes to dining, clubbing and sex with 17 year olds.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 17, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Afaik the honourable thing was he decided he must cut off contact with the paed, but rather than via a phone call, text message, What’s App, he decided the honourable thing to do would be to fly to New York and stay at the nonce’s house for nearly a week. That’s the best way to sever contact. With someone you’ve not seen in four years...


... bet there was an awkward silence when he announced that was it. At the dinner held by the nonce. In his honour.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 17, 2019)

pogofish said:


> Interesting - Sitting in a cafe up Deeside and a little while ago, one of the fellow customers (local poshos) piped up that Prince Andrew had just registered on her Facebook as "nearby". How near do you have to be for this feature to work? The main road is just a few hundred yards away.
> 
> So it looks like he's been banished back to Balmoral - which he seems to have spent a lot of time this year.


Is there a local Pizza Express?

edit: curses, beaten by danny la rouge


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 17, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Is there a local Pizza Express?


See. I’m not saying you don’t read the thread. But ...

Prince Andrew, Duke of York, named in underage 'sex slave' lawsuit


----------



## Wilf (Nov 17, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> See. I’m not saying you don’t read the thread. But ...
> 
> Prince Andrew, Duke of York, named in underage 'sex slave' lawsuit


Thanks, I might give it a read and nick the best gags.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 17, 2019)

I can’t mind who said the interview- in terms of the questions- was poor, but to be honest I think Maitlis has done well as she’s let him basically hang himself and she doesn’t even need to say much, her face and tone says it all. I think if she’d conducted it any other way it might have played better for him, she’s just sat there and listened to him talk shite and given him looks of derision and the odd comment  at all the appropriate times- he certainly can’t say he was given an unjustified  roasting either. I’m not saying she’s a woman of the people like, just that it was incredibly well played. Couldn’t have been made to look more of a cunt than this surely. I hope as many people as possible watch it and see how much of  a cunt he clearly is.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 17, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Thanks, I might give it a read and nick the best gags.


I am shamelessly nicking post traumatic sweat syndrome.


----------



## UrbaneFox (Nov 17, 2019)

friedaweed said:


> He kind of reminded me of all the times my children have lied to me and I've just gone along with it to see how much their imagination has grown.


 

I liked "I don't even know where the bar in Tramp is".

Watertight defence.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Nov 17, 2019)

It's an extraordinary interview.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 17, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I can’t mind who said the interview- in terms of the questions- was poor, but to be honest I think Maitlis has done well as she’s let him basically hang himself and she doesn’t even need to say much, her face and tone says it all. I think if she’d conducted it any other way it might have played better for him, she’s just sat there and listened to him talk shite and given him looks of derision and the odd comment  at all the appropriate times- he certainly can’t say he was given an unjustified  roasting either. I’m not saying she’s a woman of the people like, just that it was incredibly well played. Couldn’t have been made to looak more of a cunt than this surely. I hope as many people as possible watch it and see how much of  a cunt he clearly is.


My initial reaction was that she and the bbc bottled it, which is probably unfair. As you say, she did a good job of showing contempt and letting him hang himself. It leaves him much more isolated and the generic sense that he's a shit has been ramped up considerably (and to something worse). What I did think was a missed opportunity was to bring some research to the interview beyond the things already in the public domain. I'd like to have seen something that gave Giuffre more ammunition against him, which would have involved a more barristery/tabloidy approach. Are there rumours that he's done this before? Did his 'randy andy'  lifestyle involve him having women 'provided' at the social occasions he attended? Did he have sex with _anyone _when he stayed with the nonce? Why the fuck was he having massages? Why did his wife take epstein's money etc.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 17, 2019)

Wilf said:


> My initial reaction was that she and the bbc bottled it, which is probably unfair. As you say, she did a good job of showing contempt and letting him hang himself. It leaves him much more isolated and the generic sense that he's a shit has been ramped up considerably (and to something worse). What I did think was a missed opportunity was to bring some research to the interview beyond the things already in the public domain. I'd like to have seen something that gave Giuffre more ammunition against him, which would have involved a more barristery/tabloidy approach. Are there rumours that he's done this before? Did his 'randy andy'  lifestyle involve him having women 'provided' at the social occasions he attended? Did he have sex with _anyone _when he stayed with the nonce? Why the fuck was he having massages? Why did his wife take epstein's money etc.


Fair point... 
The impression I got(and it was an approach I really liked to be honest) was that she was trying to amplify this one victims voice-  repeating several times what she had said, by asking if he has a message directly for her, by asking “are you saying she is lying”
Which is very different to a barrister style approach I guess, but maybe an approach we need to see more often given the low conviction rate for this sort of thing? But yeah, i get your point


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 17, 2019)

From the comments section of BBC Newsnight’s YT channel.



> He does not regret his friendship with a paedophile.
> 
> Says it all really.


----------



## steveo87 (Nov 17, 2019)

Six things we learned from Prince Andrew interview

I can think of one....


----------



## Brainaddict (Nov 17, 2019)

Just watched some of this. Dear god. Whoever advised him not to do a tv interview had it right. Any reasonable person who had any doubts about him being a paedo has had their doubts well and truly removed.

It's true that Maitliss could have asked some more aggressive questions, but there was always the chance the right wing press could then have claimed he was 'ambushed' by a biased BBC etc. So she did a fairly low risk interview, but certainly played it well for the most part. There were a few things she could have safely pursued and asked followups on (like him saying he didn't regret being friends with Epstein because it was useful - wtaf), but I think she knew he was already hung by his own words.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 17, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Fair point...
> The impression I got(and it was an approach I really liked to be honest) was that she was trying to amplify this one victims voice-  repeating several times what she had said, by asking if he has a message directly for her, by asking “are you saying she is lying”
> Which is very different to a barrister style approach I guess, but maybe an approach we need to see more often given the low conviction rate for this sort of thing? But yeah, i get your point


Yeah, I agree and I went over the top in my criticism of her/the beeb last night. I'd just like to have seen her throw a couple of curve balls. He and his team could predict every single one of those questions (which makes it so astonishing that his answers were so godawful!).  Perhaps the most eloquent thing she could have done was just walk out on him at the end, whereas I've just read he took her and the crew on a tour of the palace (Mirror I think).


----------



## Miss-Shelf (Nov 17, 2019)

Thora said:


> Jeffery Epstein was a convicted sex offender who groomed/trafficked/raped teenage girls and had them provide massages/sex to his rich old man friends.
> Prince Andrew was one of Epstein's mates who stayed at his home/on his island/flew in his private plane.
> One of the child victims claims Andrew was one of Epstein's rich old man friends that had sex with her and she has a photo of them together at Epstein's house.
> Andrew claims it wasn't him, the photo's fake and he only hung out with his convicted paedo mate because he's an honourable chap and he definitely wasn't the sweaty creep who had sex with a child sex slave because he doesn't sweat and he was in Woking Pizza Express that night anyway.


Thank you
You could make some money doing news updates for lazy people


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 17, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Yeah, I agree and I went over the top in my criticism of her/the beeb last night. I'd just like to have seen her throw a couple of curve balls. He and his team could predict every single one of those questions (which makes it so astonishing that his answers were so godawful!).  Perhaps the most eloquent thing she could have done was just walk out on him at the end, whereas I've just read he took her and the crew on a tour of the palace (Mirror I think).


Nah if it was your post I read- I thought it was someone else’s haha- you didn’t go over the top at all...oh yeah I can imagine he did that. Whilst I think she was obvs disgusted by the whole thing she’d have defo gone along with everything else in politeness, I mean that’s the system isn’t it. Everyone’s a cunt even if they aren’t.


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 17, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Yeah, I agree and I went over the top in my criticism of her/the beeb last night. I'd just like to have seen her throw a couple of curve balls. He and his team could predict every single one of those questions (which makes it so astonishing that his answers were so godawful!)...


His PR man resigned when andy decided to do the interview.


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 17, 2019)

His answers to the photo of him with his arm around the 17yr old was bizarre, he wouldn’t say if he thought it was a fake but he thought his hand had been added, he’d never been upstairs in that house (where that photo was taken) and yes that’s him in the photo but he has no recollection of him being there or who that girl was


----------



## Wilf (Nov 17, 2019)

There are reports that windsor himself asked for the 15 grand for his ex wife from epstein (mirror again). That would have been a good one to ask him alongside all the invites to palace parties - all under the heading of how close epstein was to his extended family... or even how he 'drew a paedophile into the heart of the british royal family'. 

Again, not really having a go at Maitliss. She got the tone right, a sort of combined royal formality with incredulous contempt. Perhaps I'm just fantasising about what a barrister could do to him in court.


----------



## bluescreen (Nov 17, 2019)

Is it common knowledge that the infamous alleged photograph was taken upstairs? First I heard was Andrew's denial that he'd ever been upstairs at that house.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 17, 2019)

By the way, has anyone seen anything either expressing sympathy for or actually believing him? Suspect a couple of MRAs or similar might have offered a few pearls of wisdom, but I'm not sure I want to go looking for them.

edit: and echoing sheothebudworths you've got to be so impressed by Giuffre, given the shit that will have been flung at her, the threats and the rest.


----------



## belboid (Nov 17, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> Is it common knowledge that the infamous alleged photograph was taken upstairs? First I heard was Andrew's denial that he'd ever been upstairs at that house.


There are clearly stairs going down just behind them.


----------



## marty21 (Nov 17, 2019)

War of the Worlds started tonight on BBC1 , Martians land in Woking  I haven't seen anyone sweat yet , or have a hot pizza at Pizza Express.


----------



## bluescreen (Nov 17, 2019)

belboid said:


> There are clearly stairs going down just behind them.


Thanks. I have only seen a cut down version then. (And they wouldn't be basement steps.)


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 17, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> Is it common knowledge that the infamous alleged photograph was taken upstairs? First I heard was Andrew's denial that he'd ever been upstairs at that house.


Probably not. It’s clear from that interview the royal team thought we’d be stupid enough to swallow anything.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 17, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Probably not. It’s clear from that interview the royal team thought we’d be stupid enough to swallow anything.


Though would you respect the judgement of someone called Dickie Arbiter?


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 17, 2019)

I’m surprised Maitlis didn’t press PA on the other photos and video showing him waving off young women from the front door of Epstein’s NY mansion.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 17, 2019)

marty21 said:


> War of the Worlds started tonight on BBC1 , Martians land in Woking  I haven't seen anyone sweat yet , or have a hot pizza at Pizza Express.


'_The chances of anyone bringing their kids from Windsor Estate are a million to one. But still they come'._


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 17, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Though would you respect the judgement of someone called Dickie Arbiter?


I dunno you know, reckon he'd be fair and impartial. Like Fanny Ombudsman.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Nov 17, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I dunno you know, reckon he'd be fair and impartial. Like Fanny Ombudsman.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 17, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I dunno you know, reckon he'd be fair and impartial. Like Fanny Ombudsman.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 17, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I dunno you know, reckon he'd be fair and impartial. Like Fanny Ombudsman.


I was very impressed that the Royals weren't troubled by fears of nominative determinism when they employed Alan Planecrash and his deputy Doris Oh-Fuck to oversee the PR on this one.


----------



## D'wards (Nov 17, 2019)

Has anyone ever heard of an overdose of adrenaline? 
Or said overdose knocking out your ability to sweat? 
Is this a medically recognised thing?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 17, 2019)

D'wards said:


> Has anyone ever heard of an overdose of adrenaline?
> Or said overdose knocking out your ability to sweat?
> Is this a medically recognised thing?


The whole Andy-rhinhosis thing is but try as I might I can’t find references to this happening after “an overdose of Adrenaline”


----------



## sheothebudworths (Nov 17, 2019)

I think there's some use in the interview style she used - not straying away from being _respectful and reasonable,_ without any literal bowing, so with no leeway for any of it dismissed for that - but where for eg, she repeated _twice_ that the woman had effectively said 'I know what happened and so do you'.
That is sometimes absolutely the final word for women who have been abused by men who deny it, so I liked that she said it once and then again and then left it floating.
I'm not sure how much more value there is, in pursuing truth from a liar, than doing that.

He _knows_ and, after that interview, we all know he knows, too, the cunt.


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 17, 2019)

D'wards said:


> Has anyone ever heard of an overdose of adrenaline?
> Or said overdose knocking out your ability to sweat?
> Is this a medically recognised thing?



Only thing I’ve heard that stops sweating is botox.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 17, 2019)

sheothebudworths said:


> I think there's some use in the interview style she used - not straying away from being _respectful and reasonable,_ without any literal bowing, and with no leeway for any of it dismissed as that - but where for eg, she repeated _twice_ that the woman had effectively said 'I know what happened and so do you'.
> That is sometimes absolutely the final word for women who have been abused by men who deny it, so I liked that she said it once and then again and then left it floating.
> I'm not sure how much more value there is, in pursuing truth from a liar, than doing that.
> 
> He _knows_ and, after that interview, we all know he knows, too, the cunt.


This all sounds good and maybe I was being a bit unreasonable expecting a Columbo moment. I suspect the beeb took the decision to just go with what was in the public domain and then go for incredulity in the face  of his denials. I think they could have played it a lot dirtier, by trawling through what newspaper editors and others have on him, but maybe that would have reduced the impact of the things you highlight.


----------



## killer b (Nov 17, 2019)

It is difficult to imagine an interview much more damaging than the one that we watched last night tbh. There was no need to go in hard or dirty: just asking him to account for the stuff that we already know and letting him talk was enough.


----------



## kenny g (Nov 17, 2019)

I thought her interview style definitely did the job. The guy is fucked. What more can you ask? He does appear towards the end like he has just been smashed over the back of a head by a cricket bat.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 17, 2019)

.


----------



## A380 (Nov 17, 2019)




----------



## bluescreen (Nov 17, 2019)

Wilf said:


> By the way, has anyone seen anything either expressing sympathy for or actually believing him? Suspect a couple of MRAs or similar might have offered a few pearls of wisdom, but I'm not sure I want to go looking for them.


Well, apart from Sarah Ferguson's tweet, there's this: 





> *Amanda Thirsk*
> 
> Private secretary to Prince Andrew and director of his Pitch@Palace Global operation. It is understood that Thirsk clashed with Stein [HRH's press secretary, who resigned two weeks ago rather than let the interview go ahead] and pushed hard for Andrew to do the interview in the face of his initial scepticism, persuading him that it was the best way to draw a line under the rumours about the nature of his relationship with convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein. A former banker, she joined Andrew’s office in 2012. Described by one colleague as a “force of nature” who thinks “the Duke has done nothing wrong … All he did was go and see his friend.”


Who were the main players behind the Prince Andrew interview?


----------



## sheothebudworths (Nov 17, 2019)

Wilf said:


> This all sounds good and maybe I was being a bit unreasonable expecting a Columbo moment. I suspect the beeb took the decision to just go with what was in the public domain and then go for incredulity in the face  of his denials. I think they could have played it a lot dirtier, by trawling through what newspaper editors and others have on him, but maybe that would have reduced the impact of the things you highlight.



God, no, I don't doubt this - but it _was_ pre-recorded, wasn't it? 
So how do you balance getting it out, letting him dig his own grave - with considered questions that no fucker could object to - against having the whole thing pulled? 
I'm still amazed it went out as it was.
I thought it was interesting that he talked about social media, too - are they all wringing their hands now 'fuck, we HAVE to talk!'?

I do not mean more questions shouldn't and/or couldn't have been asked (although, as has rightly been said, those should clearly be saved for a legal grilling anyway) - just within the fucking structures we have, I thought it was quite well judged (and tbc, I don't even mean that I'm sure they *wanted* it to go as badly as it already did).


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 17, 2019)

EM :‘Would you be willing to testify or give a statement under oath if you were asked?’

PA: ‘I would have to take all the legal advice that there was before I would do that type of thing’.

Plead the fifth?

No comment?


----------



## binka (Nov 17, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> Well, apart from Sarah Ferguson's tweet, there's this:
> Who were the main players behind the Prince Andrew interview?


Draw a line under it!? There was no way on earth this interview could ever answer more questions than it raised. 

How much is Amanda Thirsk being paid I wonder? I assume she has met Andrew and noticed how thick he is? And she must have known that he's never done a serious interview before? And she thought it was a good idea to get a reporter to ask him a series of questions about his convicted child abuser mate? And then broadcast it? There was no way this interview could ever not be a disaster for him


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 17, 2019)

I'm no expert on interview techniques or whatever but he did the interview and the next day a) everybody is talking about it and b) everybody thinks he's a nonce. So I reckon it was probably quite a good effort from Maitliss


----------



## gosub (Nov 17, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I was very impressed that the Royals weren't troubled by fears of nominative determinism when they employed Alan Planecrash and his deputy Doris Oh-Fuck to oversee the PR on this one.



 


still,  probably won't get asked to do /\ again (which is a result all round)


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Nov 17, 2019)

I'm just watching this. Oh my god he just comes across as a massive fucking liar!

Going for a walk in Central Park to tell someone that you can never been seen together again!?!?!


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 17, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I'm no expert on interview techniques or whatever but he did the interview and the next day a) everybody is talking about it and b) everybody thinks he's a nonce. So I reckon it was probably quite a good effort from Maitliss



Apart from public opinion going against him, he’s not going to be arrested and he’s still going to live the highly privileged life he leads.

What real consequence is he going to face apart from this passing discomfort of scrutiny?


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 17, 2019)

Mrs Miggins said:


> I'm just watching this. Oh my god he just comes across as a massive fucking liar!
> 
> Going for a walk in Central Park to tell someone that you can never been seen together again!?!?!


After staying with him for four days because it was convenient.  

/typo edit


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Nov 17, 2019)

"I don't know where the bar in Tramp is" 
What a fucking prick.


----------



## bluescreen (Nov 17, 2019)

The thread title ^^ is shocking every time. He has no idea whatsoever. He could have said 'I have never fucked anyone against their will. I have never fucked any 17 year old ever.' If it was true.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 17, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Apart from public opinion going against him, he’s not going to be arrested and he’s still going to live the highly privileged life he leads.
> 
> What real consequence is he going to face apart from this passing discomfort of scrutiny?


Well it was always unlikely any interviewer would force a confession that would lead to a criminal trial tbf


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Nov 17, 2019)

I've just watched it - jesus.  Maitliss handled it well I think.  I don't know whether it is the colour balance on my monitor, but I'm sure he was becoming more flushed as the interview wore on too.


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Nov 17, 2019)

It is notable that it's all "I can't remember"


----------



## bluescreen (Nov 17, 2019)

Mrs Miggins said:


> It is notable that it's all "I can't remember"


Apart from the memorable visit to Pizza Express.


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Nov 17, 2019)

Mrs Miggins said:


> It is notable that it's all "I can't remember"


But he could confirm that some things definitely didn't happen - that combination came across as odd.


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Nov 17, 2019)

farmerbarleymow said:


> But he could confirm that some things definitely didn't happen - that combination came across as odd.


Exactly. It looks like he's been told to say he can't remember when asked about things where there is potential for further proof to come to light. The photograph for instance. What absolute tosh.


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Nov 17, 2019)

Mrs Miggins said:


> I'm just watching this. Oh my god he just comes across as a massive fucking liar!
> 
> Going for a walk in Central Park to tell someone that you can never been seen together again!?!?!


That was another weird aspect of it.  I'd guess most people would simply stop contact with someone convicted of sex offences and not fly across the Atlantic to say so face to face.  Just stop answering calls, etc.  That can't be difficult for a member of the royal family to do surely.


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Nov 17, 2019)

farmerbarleymow said:


> That was another weird aspect of it.  I'd guess most people would simply stop contact with someone convicted of sex offences and not fly across the Atlantic to say so face to face.  Just stop answering calls, etc.  That can't be difficult for a member of the royal family to do surely.


That's because it is a blatant lie.


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Nov 17, 2019)

Mrs Miggins said:


> That's because it is a blatant lie.


The most damning thing for me was his excuse for staying in his house - because it was 'convenient'.  For fucks sake, he's not short of a bob or two for hotels, and as a royal I suspect Epstein would want to meet him, rather than Andrew having to try and get time with him.


----------



## pseudonarcissus (Nov 17, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> The thread title ^^ is shocking every time. He has no idea whatsoever. He could have said 'I have never fucked anyone against their will. I have never fucked any 17 year old ever.' If it was true.


As someone up-thread pointed out, the palace has already implicitly admitted in the phrase “underage minor” suggests he has had a go at minors (17 yos).


----------



## bluescreen (Nov 17, 2019)

He believes he's above and beyond reproach. He's not used to little people questioning him. They will do as they're told and will not challenge him. His whole attitude reeks of contempt. He is a living advert for republicanism.


----------



## pseudonarcissus (Nov 17, 2019)

Mrs Miggins said:


> "I don't know where the bar in Tramp is"
> What a fucking prick.


Probably to
He only true bit, he’s never bought his own drinks


----------



## pseudonarcissus (Nov 17, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> His whole attitude reeks of contempt. He is a living advert for republicanism.


You think Boris or Cameron as PMs under a republic would have a different mind-set?


----------



## Don Troooomp (Nov 17, 2019)

One thing is for sure, hanging about with a convicted perv was idiotic. Apart from that, I'm inclined to believe he was part of the whole thing, not just because the interview was a string of lame excuses, but he claims to know nothing about something he was photographed being part of. The photo in itself is nothing, but it becomes a lot when you take the rest into account.
Even if the woman is lying about him raping her, he's very likely to have been at it with others. I don't trust his word to the point I would accuse him of being a liar.


----------



## bluescreen (Nov 17, 2019)

pseudonarcissus said:


> You think Boris or Cameron as PMs under a republic would have a different mind-set?


No. But a PM in a republic wouldn't necessarily be head of state.


----------



## pseudonarcissus (Nov 17, 2019)

Don Troooomp said:


> One thing is for sure, hanging about with a convicted perv was idiotic. Apart from that, I'm inclined to believe he was part of the whole thing, not just because the interview was a string of lame excuses, but he claims to know nothing about something he was photographed being part of. The photo in itself is nothing, but it becomes a lot when you take the rest into account.
> Even if the woman is lying about him raping her, he's very likely to have been at it with others. I don't trust his word to the point I would accuse him of being a liar.


I suspect he wasn’t introduced the the young lady as being a trafficked sex slave, and presumably mr Epstein knew a thing or two about grooming, but celebs assuming anyone put in front of them is “gagging for it“ will always be an area to tread carefully where consent is concerned.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 17, 2019)

why the fuck did he carry on hanging out with epstein after his conviction? thats what i find baffling. his advisors/the spooks must surely have been warning him off. Its almost wilful. im sure the duke of nonce had plenty of other, more discreet,  ways of indulging his taste for underage girls without hanging out with a convicted pederast. It really must be a deeply ingrained belief that he can do what the fuck he likes and - more even disturbing - he didn't see anything wrong with what epstein did.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 18, 2019)

Prince Andrew: Calls for royal to say sorry and speak to FBI

the cunt's now toxic.



> businesses and charities were under growing pressure to review their links to the prince and his pitch@palace initiative for entrepreneurs, which stages events at Buckingham Palace and around the world.



although apparently he thought the interview had gone very well. not sure he's thinking that now.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 18, 2019)

sheothebudworths said:


> God, no, I don't doubt this - but it _was_ pre-recorded, wasn't it?
> So how do you balance getting it out, letting him dig his own grave - with considered questions that no fucker could object to - against having the whole thing pulled?
> I'm still amazed it went out as it was.
> I thought it was interesting that he talked about social media, too - are they all wringing their hands now 'fuck, we HAVE to talk!'?
> ...


This might sound like me being unwilling to compliment Maitliss and her team, but the thing is I'm wondering if they expected him to be so dreadful and hang himself or whether they just got lucky?  With her demeanour and as you say, repeating those questions to him with masses of scorn, Maitliss reinforced that his answers were both vile and obvious lies. But I wonder - and this might be me being uncharitable to them - how it would have gone if he'd performed better or come up with better/more presentable lies?  Suppose it's in that kind of scenario that a bit of extra evidence would have worked out as plan B.

Anyway, he made none of that necessary.  Every lie, literally, managed to combine misogyny, gross entitlement and contempt for his audience. Well done you cunt.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 18, 2019)

Mrs Miggins said:


> I'm just watching this. Oh my god he just comes across as a massive fucking liar!
> 
> Going for a walk in Central Park to tell someone that you can never been seen together again!?!?!


As Bananarama warned him all those years back, 'a walk in the park can become a bad dream'.


----------



## Weller (Nov 18, 2019)

pseudonarcissus said:


> The only true bit, he’s never bought his own drinks


True you get a free 1 litre bottle of Tango with 2 pizzas from pizza express on a Friday


----------



## Calamity1971 (Nov 18, 2019)

farmerbarleymow said:


> I'm sure he was becoming more flushed as the interview wore on too.


I thought he kept fluctuating between flushed, and the colour draining to boiled shite.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 18, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> why the fuck did he carry on hanging out with epstein after his conviction? thats what i find baffling. his advisors/the spooks must surely have been warning him off. Its almost wilful. im sure the duke of nonce had plenty of other, more discreet,  ways of indulging his taste for underage girls without hanging out with a convicted pederast. It really must be a deeply ingrained belief that he can do what the fuck he likes and - more even disturbing - he didn't see anything wrong with what epstein did.


I suspect it's exactly this.

No doubt covered in the last 49 pages, but I've always wondered about the level of entourage he travelled with on his nonce trips. He was travelling in a private capacity I presume, though that isn't entirely clear as there was some talk of nipping over to Boston for some kind of shindig within the 4 day 'we can't be friends any more' trip. Presumably he used epstein's servants at the mansion, but I struggle to imagine him setting off from Heathrow without a bodyguard. Ditto some kind of protection staff as he moved from NY to Boston. So even when he was off on nonce holidays there would have been someone official to confirm or deny parts of his story. Tellingly, there hasn't been a queue of royal protection officers lining up to say 'I definitely drove to Pizza Express', but neither have there been tales of the Met refusing to back him up.

Edit: and here's the former head of a large royal protection team calling him a liar:
Prince Andrew must be investigated by police after TV interview, ex-top cop says


----------



## extra dry (Nov 18, 2019)

I think he will commit suicide, method he crashes a helicoptor into Winsor castle while in a note he blames Brexit.


----------



## pseudonarcissus (Nov 18, 2019)

extra dry said:


> I think he will commit suicide, method he crashes a helicoptor into Winsor castle while in a note he blames Brexit.


Not Phil the Greek?


----------



## Wilf (Nov 18, 2019)

pseudonarcissus said:


> Not Phil the Greek?


Yeah, I was thinking they might just ask his Pa to drive the distressed young princeling home last night.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 18, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I suspect it's exactly this.
> 
> No doubt covered in the last 49 pages, but I've always wondered about the level of entourage he travelled with on his nonce trips. He was travelling in a private capacity I presume, though that isn't entirely clear as there was some talk of nipping over to Boston for some kind of shindig within the 4 day 'we can't be friends any more' trip. Presumably he used epstein's servants at the mansion, but I struggle to imagine him setting off from Heathrow without a bodyguard. Ditto some kind of protection staff as he moved from NY to Boston. So even when he was off on nonce holidays there would have been someone official to confirm or deny parts of his story. Tellingly, there hasn't been a queue of royal protection officers lining up to say 'I definitely drove to Pizza Express', but neither have there been tales of the Met refusing to back him up.
> 
> ...



... which in turn makes me wonder about the official secrets act, which he presumably signed. Not sure what he said actually breaches it, but you'd imagine bods like him would be in the habit of keeping schtum about everything. Maybe the Mirror's shilling was too bright.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 18, 2019)

anyway, must go back to being depressed about the election rather than enraged and amused by him.


----------



## andysays (Nov 18, 2019)

Don Troooomp said:


> ...Even if the woman is lying about him raping her...


Why would you say this? (apart from the obvious answer that you're an utter cunt)


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 18, 2019)

Blimey, the Metro has gone to town with their headline.


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 18, 2019)

As Buckingham Palace dealt with the backlash from Prince Andrew’s interview with Emily Maitlis in which he failed to express any sympathy for victims of the billionaire paedophile, he was even said to have told the Queen that his appearance on the BBC Two _Newsnight _special had been a success.

A success?


----------



## Rosemary Jest (Nov 18, 2019)

Well, I for one believe everything he said.


----------



## killer b (Nov 18, 2019)

Wilf said:


> This might sound like me being unwilling to compliment Maitliss and her team, but the thing is I'm wondering if they expected him to be so dreadful and hang himself or whether they just got lucky?  With her demeanour and as you say, repeating those questions to him with masses of scorn, Maitliss reinforced that his answers were both vile and obvious lies. But I wonder - and this might be me being uncharitable to them - how it would have gone if he'd performed better or come up with better/more presentable lies?  Suppose it's in that kind of scenario that a bit of extra evidence would have worked out as plan B.
> 
> Anyway, he made none of that necessary.  Every lie, literally, managed to combine misogyny, gross entitlement and contempt for his audience. Well done you cunt.


I think they did get lucky, but the luck wasnt in these specific responses: it was in him agreeing to the interview at all. However he responded to the very straightforward questions, asking him to account for the things we already know - lies or the truth - was going to be extaordinary.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 18, 2019)

Hopefully the remarkable widespread condemnation of Andrew leads to a greater willingness to look into the entire institution of Monarchy, which is rotten to the core. Maybe this is the beginning of the end for them. I hope so.

And if that institution can fall, which others can?


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 18, 2019)

Hopefully the remarkable widespread condemnation of Andrew leads to a greater willingness to look into the entire institution of Monarchy, which is rotten to the core. Maybe this is the beginning of the end for them. I hope so.

And if that institution can fall, which others can?


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 18, 2019)

Fabulous. A four poster. How apt.


----------



## Plumdaff (Nov 18, 2019)

D'wards said:


> Has anyone ever heard of an overdose of adrenaline?
> Or said overdose knocking out your ability to sweat?
> Is this a medically recognised thing?



There are medical conditions in which you can't sweat. You can also use botox not to. But an "overdose of adrenaline" is not a known cause, nor said OD wearing off.


----------



## tim (Nov 18, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Looks like Icke has been following this scandal.
> 
> Prince Andrew - The Walls Are Closing In.
> 
> ...




You should be extradited to Indonesia and fed to Kimono dragons


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 18, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> As Buckingham Palace dealt with the backlash from Prince Andrew’s interview with Emily Maitlis in which he failed to express any sympathy for victims of the billionaire paedophile, he was even said to have told the Queen that his appearance on the BBC Two _Newsnight _special had been a success.
> 
> A success?


Can you imagine? "Mummy, I did so well. Let's sit down and watch it, you're going to be so proud..."


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 18, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Hopefully the remarkable widespread condemnation of Andrew leads to a greater willingness to look into the entire institution of Monarchy, which is rotten to the core. Maybe this is the beginning of the end for them. I hope so.
> 
> And if that institution can fall, which others can?


I've been curious how this is all going down in more Royalist circles.

Sadly, can't help thinking most will either see him as a single black sheep wrong'un who has brought shame to his otherwise tip-top family, and/or think it's a stitch up, more is being made out of it than they should.

Would be nice to see the back of them, but I'd be (happily) surprised if this is what did it.


----------



## Don Troooomp (Nov 18, 2019)

andysays said:


> Why would you say this? (apart from the obvious answer that you're an utter cunt)



Just because she said it doesn't mean it's true - It might well be, and frankly I suspect it probably is, but there's no proof at the moment and there's unlikely to be any.
He's got away with it, so we can't actually say he did it, just I don't believe a  word he says.

Ask me if he did it - The answer has to be probably. If you can say he did, please send the evidence to whomever needs to see it and it's game over for him; the slimy git very probably deserves it.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Nov 18, 2019)

Lord Camomile said:


> I've been curious how this is all going down in more Royalist circles.
> 
> Sadly, can't help thinking most will either see him as a single black sheep wrong'un who has brought shame to his otherwise tip-top family, and/or think it's a stitch up, more is being made out of it than they should.
> 
> Would be nice to see the back of them, but I'd be (happily) surprised if this is what did it.



I think they have no place in our society, but now more then ever I wonder what the hell we'd replace them with. President Johnson?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 18, 2019)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> I think they have no place in our society, but now more then ever I wonder what the hell we'd replace them with. President Johnson?


Yes, for a month or two while the nefandous creature starved in a cage hanging from Waterloo Bridge


----------



## JimW (Nov 18, 2019)

tim said:


> and fed to Kimono dragons


That would wrap things up nicely


----------



## Don Troooomp (Nov 18, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> the cunt's now toxic.



Hopefully he will remain that way but the story will probably die a death when the next thing comes along. All that's likely to happen is he'll disappear into obscurity until he dies ... unless something else incriminating comes up. If that happens, this'll all come flooding back to haunt him.
It would be nice to see him at the FBI's offices, but it's unlikely to happen.
Frankly, even hanging around with a convicted kiddie fidler rapist is enough to dump him from all royal duties, but his interview, or at least the bits I watched, was unconvincing at best. I don't believe a word, but my point of view simply doesn't matter, as is true of everyone elses unless something more concrete comes along to get him.


----------



## maomao (Nov 18, 2019)

Don Troooomp said:


> , but my point of view simply doesn't matter, as is true of everyone elses unless something more concrete comes along to get him.


Your point of view actually matters less than anyone else's because everyone thinks you're a dick.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 18, 2019)

Don Troooomp said:


> Hopefully he will remain that way but the story will probably die a death when the next thing comes along. All that's likely to happen is he'll disappear into obscurity until he dies ... unless something else incriminating comes up. If that happens, this'll all come flooding back to haunt him.
> It would be nice to see him at the FBI's offices, but it's unlikely to happen.
> Frankly, even hanging around with a convicted kiddie fidler rapist is enough to dump him from all royal duties, but his interview, or at least the bits I watched, was unconvincing at best. I don't believe a word, but my point of view simply doesn't matter, as is true of everyone elses unless something more concrete comes along to get him.



with that point of view you should stop posting here immediately.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Nov 18, 2019)

So...how will he be gotten rid of?
Any thoughts? Cos he's one hell of a liabiity to the royals now isnt he? 
I'm putting my money on a hunting accident...or maybe crashing into a tree...or just found dead somewhere....


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 18, 2019)

Lupa said:


> So...how will he be gotten rid of?
> Any thoughts? Cos he's one hell of a liabiity to the royals now isnt he?
> I'm putting my money on a hunting accident...or maybe crashing into a tree...or just found dead somewhere....


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 18, 2019)

Today program in full cringe mode. Apparently, the main talking point from this is the questions over the duke of nonce's media strategy, how its difficult for the royals to "reach out" to the public, how the prince has been badly advised. Item ended with a smirk "well - i dont think he'll be doing anymore interviews!". Jawdropping. 
This isn't a bungled royal PR stunt like "its a royal knockout" - hes been accused of raping a 17 year old and being bezzies with a notorious serial rapist and paedophile - and his attempt to deny and explain this has revealed him to be a thick as shit, entitled, arrogant, unfeeling cunt who gives every impression of being guilty as fuck.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 18, 2019)

Phil will treat him to a little fishing trip on loch muick


----------



## killer b (Nov 18, 2019)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> I think they have no place in our society, but now more then ever I wonder what the hell we'd replace them with. President Johnson?


Why would you need to replace them?


----------



## Duncan2 (Nov 18, 2019)

Its a bit surprising to me that,apparently,no one has made much,any, effort to interview Ghislaine.Probably too late now that she has seen how badly these exculpatory interviews can go.


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 18, 2019)

Lupa said:


> So...how will he be gotten rid of?
> Any thoughts? Cos he's one hell of a liabiity to the royals now isnt he?
> I'm putting my money on a hunting accident...or maybe crashing into a tree...or just found dead somewhere....



Possibly do a Lord Lucan?


----------



## Duncan2 (Nov 18, 2019)

Natural causes would be entirely plausible.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 18, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Possibly do a Lord Lucan?


more like what happened to the princes in the tower or - most likely - the man in the iron mask


----------



## Don Troooomp (Nov 18, 2019)

Duncan2 said:


> Natural causes would be entirely plausible.



Perhaps he will die of syphilis - People would believe that.


----------



## killer b (Nov 18, 2019)

Nothing is going to happen to him.


----------



## xenon (Nov 18, 2019)

No one was really talking about this in the media any more. It's the middle of a GE campaign. Why do this now. Anyone reckon there's more to come out, other witness accounts and this has been an attempt to get his account, an account in early. Or simply out of arrogance and gormelessness, he thought this dire display would convince people of his becomingness.


----------



## Duncan2 (Nov 18, 2019)

xenon said:


> No one was really talking about this in the media any more. It's the middle of a GE campaign. Why do this now. Anyone reckon there's more to come out, other witness accounts and this has been an attempt to get his account, an account in early. Or simply out of arrogance and gormelessness, he thought this dire display would convince people of his becomingness.


He had to do it now cos, had he left it another two weeks, he and Maitlis would have been sat under the Christmas tree.


----------



## elbows (Nov 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Even his mother despises him, and she desired nothing more than the rest of the country share her contempt for this odious turd - hence her consent for this interview



The arrogant bore has often been said to be her favourite son.

I watched Dennis Potters 1971 version of Casanova not too long ago, in which the world of the serial seducer is revealed to be the cold void of the narcissist. Turns out it was probably good background preparation for the fall of this royal bollock.

No shortage of 1980s tv archive horrors that have a fresh resonance now. Already covered that Spitting Image knew which attributes to focus on, but there is other stuff too, such as the final 10 seconds or so of this:


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Nov 18, 2019)

This morning I am remembering how, with a totally straight face, he could say "just an ordinary shooting weekend". Like that's the most normal thing in the world.

He is also claiming this morning that he has "great sympathy" for anyone abused by Epstein. Funny he didn't say anything remotely like that when he had the opportunity to attempt to clear his name on national television.


----------



## xenon (Nov 18, 2019)

Mrs Miggins said:


> This morning I am remembering how, with a totally straight face, he could say "just an ordinary shooting weekend". Like that's the most normal thing in the world.
> 
> He is also claiming this morning that he has "great sympathy" for anyone abosed by Epstein. Funny he didn't say anything remotely like that when he had the opportunity to attempt to clear his name on national television.



 Yeah, right at the end when he was asked if there was anything else he wanted to add.  Blatant queue for him to say something about the victims, show some empathy  but no. What did he say. You’ve dragged most of it out. Pfft


----------



## Chilli.s (Nov 18, 2019)

His lack of sympathy for the victims is a stand out for me.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 18, 2019)

i don't believe a word of his 'alibi' for the simple reason that he will have a staff who will maintain his diaries for him, listing every appointment. so all he'd have needed to do would be to ask one of them to pluck down the appointment diary for 2001 to see precisely what he'd been doing on eg 10 march.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 18, 2019)

Statement Analysis ®: Statement Analysis: Prince Andrew Interview

more social media grist. i dunno how accurate this is but any stick to beat the royal midden is good enough for me


----------



## ignatious (Nov 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i don't believe a word of his 'alibi' for the simple reason that he will have a staff who will maintain his diaries for him, listing every appointment. so all he'd have needed to do would be to ask one of them to pluck down the appointment diary for 2001 to see precisely what he'd been doing on eg 10 march.



It wasn’t a particularly good alibi either. What with children’s birthday parties rarely overlapping with nightclub hours.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 18, 2019)

ignatious said:


> It wasn’t a particularly good alibi either. What with children’s birthday parties rarely overlapping with nightclub hours.


that too.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 18, 2019)

ignatious said:


> It wasn’t a particularly good alibi either. What with children’s birthday parties rarely overlapping with nightclub hours.


from woking pizza express to tramp nightclub


----------



## quimcunx (Nov 18, 2019)

Duncan2 said:


> Its a bit surprising to me that,apparently,no one has made much,any, effort to interview Ghislaine.Probably too late now that she has seen how badly these exculpatory interviews can go.




I'm sure they would if they could but she's laying low and no one (who cares to tell) knows where she is.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 18, 2019)

shes got plenty of experience in lying low given the family history


----------



## clicker (Nov 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i don't believe a word of his 'alibi' for the simple reason that he will have a staff who will maintain his diaries for him, listing every appointment. so all he'd have needed to do would be to ask one of them to pluck down the appointment diary for 2001 to see precisely what he'd been doing on eg 10 march.


It can't be that hard for the manager of the pizza place on that date to be found. He would remember it if it happened, which makes me tend to believe it did. 
But Andrew is desperately trying to confuse us simpletons with tales of eating out,  like us common folk. He's one of our own etc...it's  the nightime( when he was at Tramp) he needs and doesn't have an alibi for.


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Nov 18, 2019)

clicker said:


> It can't be that hard for the manager of the pizza place on that date to be found. He would remember it if it happened, which makes me tend to believe it did.
> But Andrew is desperately trying to confuse us simpletons with tales of eating out,  like us common folk. He's one of our own etc...it's  the nightime( when he was at Tramp) he needs and doesn't have an alibi for.


It must be true as it could be proved but as you say, it doesn't mean he wasn't in Tramp all night not dancing, not sweating and not buying drinks because he doesn't know where the bar is.


----------



## killer b (Nov 18, 2019)

Him not buying drinks and not knowing where the bar in Tramps is, is the only believable thing he said in the entire interview.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 18, 2019)

Mrs Miggins said:


> It must be true as it could be proved but as you say, it doesn't mean he wasn't in Tramp all night not dancing, not sweating and not buying drinks because he doesn't know where the bar is.


what's the point of being a prince if you have to go to the bar for yourself?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> what's the point of being a prince if you have to go to the bar for yourself?



indeed. or worry about petty nonsense like paying taxes or sex having to be consensual.


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Nov 18, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> ....or sex having to be consensual.



See with that...with him...I have a very strong supicion that it would never enter his head that anyone might NOT want to have sex with him because, well, he's Prince Andrew isn't he?


----------



## Wilf (Nov 18, 2019)

clicker said:


> It can't be that hard for the manager of the pizza place on that date to be found. He would remember it if it happened, which makes me tend to believe it did.
> But Andrew is desperately trying to confuse us simpletons with tales of eating out,  like us common folk. He's one of our own etc...it's  the nightime( when he was at Tramp) he needs and doesn't have an alibi for.


I was interested in the bit about how he remembered the Pizza Express trip when someone 'reminded him of it'. I also have a feeling it may be true, though utterly irrelevant to the clubbing thing, as you say. But with the 'someone reminded me' he was keen to avoid the specifics of _who _reminded him. Unless it was one of his kids (I think they went to the pizza thing iirc?) it was either one of his flunkies/diary person or a royal protection goon. If I'm right on that, it would be a good line for journos to pursue with the palace, forcing them to get drawn in further to his web of lies.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 18, 2019)

Mrs Miggins said:


> See with that...with him...I have a very strong supicion that it would never enter his head that anyone might NOT want to have sex with him because, well, he's Prince Andrew isn't he?


I'm sure that's true and with epstein doing the dirty work of trafficking the women, you had a perfect case of supply and demand (though that feels like a flippant way of describing a rape). That's why I've been interested in his pattern of behaviour and whether journos are sitting on similar cases, the extent to which 'house parties', dinners with him as the 'guest of honour', have been set up similarly. That's speculating way beyond the careful way you should approach any potential court case, but in his case, fuck him. He's not going to see the inside of a police station so let's hope things get uncomfortable for him in other ways.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 18, 2019)

Lupa said:


> So...how will he be gotten rid of?
> Any thoughts? Cos he's one hell of a liabiity to the royals now isnt he?
> I'm putting my money on a hunting accident...or maybe crashing into a tree...or just found dead somewhere....


He is of an age where he can die of natural causes in his sleep.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 18, 2019)

I see he is a racist nonce


----------



## TopCat (Nov 18, 2019)

Duncan2 said:


> Its a bit surprising to me that,apparently,no one has made much,any, effort to interview Ghislaine.Probably too late now that she has seen how badly these exculpatory interviews can go.


She has been in hiding no?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 18, 2019)

Prince Andrew used N-word in Buckingham Palace, ex-Downing Street aide claims

Prince Andrew used N-word in Buckingham Palace, ex-Downing Street aide claims


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 18, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I was very impressed that the Royals weren't troubled by fears of nominative determinism when they employed Alan Planecrash and his deputy Doris Oh-Fuck to oversee the PR on this one.



Seems to me like he was prepped for the interview by Alan Partridge tbh.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 18, 2019)

TopCat said:


> He is of an age where he can die of natural causes in his sleep.



A bit too soon after his chum hung himself of natural causes peacefully in his sleep.


----------



## Idris2002 (Nov 18, 2019)

TopCat said:


> She has been in hiding no?


That or she's dead.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 18, 2019)

TopCat said:


> He is of an age where he can die of natural causes in his sleep.


in royal circles being smothered counts, legally, as death by natural causes


----------



## TopCat (Nov 18, 2019)

Idris2002 said:


> That or she's dead.


Yeah. She is at the heart of this. By all accounts she was Epsteins procurere of girls. She managed the girl's emotionally  and directed them what to do sex wise to Epstein and his pals. 

I would not be surprised if she never is seen again.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 18, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> A bit too soon after his chum hung himself of natural causes peacefully in his sleep.


Previously blocked sweat glands gushed forth. Death by low sodium count.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 18, 2019)

.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 18, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Yeah. She is at the heart of this. By all accounts she was Epsteins procurere of girls. She managed the girl's emotionally  and directed them what to do sex wise to Epstein and his pals.
> 
> I would not be surprised if she never is seen again.


she sleeps with the fishes


----------



## bluescreen (Nov 18, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Yeah. She is at the heart of this. By all accounts she was Epsteins procurere of girls. She managed the girl's emotionally  and directed them what to do sex wise to Epstein and his pals.
> 
> I would not be surprised if she never is seen again.


Yes. There is a comment on the Statement Analysis blog @not-bono-ever linked to above:


> *Foolsfeedonfolly* said...
> 
> Ghislaine Maxwell, Jeffrey Epstein's girlfriend and a British socialite, had oversight of Epstein's homes and island, and all the hiring for those places. She is accused of procuring the underage minors that were being trafficked on Epstein's plane and in all the locations. Listen to what Prince Andrew says about her.
> 
> ...


----------



## Wilf (Nov 18, 2019)

Caught a glancing blow on the head by Budgie the Helicopter. Death by Irony.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Nov 18, 2019)

tim said:


> You should be extradited to Indonesia and fed to Kimono dragons


The fuck have you got against kimono dragons?


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 18, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> The fuck have you got against kimono dragons?


Their silk dressing gowns are pretentious.


----------



## 2hats (Nov 18, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> The fuck have you got against kimono dragons?


Their dress sense?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 18, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Their silk dressing gowns are pretentious.





2hats said:


> Their dress sense?


oh very good


----------



## Wilf (Nov 18, 2019)

2hats said:


> Their dress sense?


... and the Sparks albums.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Nov 18, 2019)

Lol only just figured that one out. I would say I feel stupid but I'm still a fucking genius compared to Prince charming.


----------



## flypanam (Nov 18, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Yeah. She is at the heart of this. By all accounts she was Epsteins procurere of girls. She managed the girl's emotionally  and directed them what to do sex wise to Epstein and his pals.
> 
> I would not be surprised if she never is seen again.


Rumoured to be in Brazil. She's supposedly pals with Bolsanaro.


----------



## maomao (Nov 18, 2019)

Well the n-word revelations have sewn it up. I already had a colleague arguing that it 'couldn't be rape' yesterday. Now we know he likes a bit of casual racism he'll be half the country's favourite royal by the end of the week. They've needed a new one since Harry stopped putting it about and got woke.


----------



## maomao (Nov 18, 2019)

flypanam said:


> Rumoured to be in Brazil. She's supposedly pals with Bolsanaro.


She's probably already booked a yacht to fall overboard from.


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Nov 18, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Their silk dressing gowns are pretentious.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 18, 2019)

Mrs Miggins said:


> View attachment 190300


have you a picture of a kimono dragon tucking into a plate of smoked fish?


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Nov 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> have you a picture of a kimono dragon tucking into a plate of smoked fish?


Not yet but I'm working on it


----------



## Chz (Nov 18, 2019)

I'm a bit late to all the details, but the one thing that strikes me is that it's awfully shit of him (on top of all the other shit things) to drag his daughter into his alibi.


----------



## andysays (Nov 18, 2019)

maomao said:


> Well the n-word revelations have sewn it up. I already had a colleague arguing that it 'couldn't be rape' yesterday. Now we know he likes a bit of casual racism he'll be half the country's favourite royal by the end of the week. They've needed a new one since Harry stopped putting it about and got woke.


I'm struggling to keep up with details of all the revelations, but I assumed that in Andrew's case the n-word was "nonce"


----------



## maomao (Nov 18, 2019)

andysays said:


> I'm struggling to keep up with details of all the revelations, but I assumed that in Andrew's case the n-word was "nonce"


I think we're allowed to say nonce.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 18, 2019)

maomao said:


> I think we're allowed to say nonce.


I think we’re _supposed_ to say “alleged nonce”, but that’s a formality.


----------



## Rebelda (Nov 18, 2019)

I can't help but think the interview was done, accepting it would be a car crash, now so that it can be swamped and forgotten by election coverage. Then he can say 'well I did an interview'. It's done the Conservatives a favour too, distracting from their current beasting.


----------



## Jay Park (Nov 18, 2019)

Mrs Miggins said:


> See with that...with him...I have a very strong supicion that it would never enter his head that anyone might NOT want to have sex with him because, well, he's Prince Andrew isn't he?



He’s proper fuglarse though


----------



## Jay Park (Nov 18, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Seems to me like he was prepped for the interview by Alan Partridge tbh.



Tim - nice but - Dim


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 18, 2019)

Not nice

These cunts get away with murder by playing affable toffs


----------



## Jay Park (Nov 18, 2019)

Certainly dim. His Manson lamps wig me right-out too.


----------



## elbows (Nov 18, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> Not nice
> 
> These cunts get away with murder by playing affable toffs



His arrogance, self-importance and ability to bore make him especially ill suited to coming across as affable.

But yeah, most of the media focus does provide ample opportunities to witness the plethora of ugly priorities. Its all about how to draw a line and move on, how this affects the royal household, how horribly embarrassing the whole thing is, how the Queens 'dont complain and dont explain' approach was much more dignified. 'Why didnt he just keep quiet?' they cry, as if these are the most important matters on which he should be judged. Crap games in a different world with entirely different standards, with one large exception - the recent complaint that he didnt express any sympathy towards victims was at least a starting point that could (but probably wont) pop the bubble and expose him to the same clamour for justice that normal people would face.

This shit is also seen when someone of prominence actually gets found guilty and the judge finds reason to be lenient with the sentence. This person rose so very high that they have since had so terribly far to fall, their public disgrace is punishment enough. Fuck that!


----------



## Sweet FA (Nov 18, 2019)

Have we had this one yet?


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 18, 2019)

Epstein went to Beatrice's 18th birthday party.


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Nov 18, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Epstein went to Beatrice's 18th birthday party.


But it was only Ghislane Maxwell who was invited. Epstein was "just the plus one" which makes it all absolutely fine!


----------



## Rebelda (Nov 18, 2019)

Eurgh the photos. He looks like the kind of man you would never, ever sit next to. Or stand near. Those poor girls


----------



## bluescreen (Nov 18, 2019)

Is that Ghislaine in the background again?


----------



## ruffneck23 (Nov 18, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> Is that Ghislaine in the background again?


certainly looks like it.


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Nov 18, 2019)

His teeth are really starting to frighten me.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 18, 2019)

Mrs Miggins said:


> His teeth are really starting to frighten me.


Horse faced cunt that he is 

Sad to say I met him once


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 18, 2019)

Sweet FA said:


> Have we had this one yet?
> 
> View attachment 190315


That’s not how he dresses in London. And it probably isn’t his hand: he doesn’t touch people.


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 18, 2019)

Sweet FA said:


> Have we had this one yet?
> 
> View attachment 190315



Where was that taken?

No good asking PA, he won’t recall.


----------



## JimW (Nov 18, 2019)

Clearly cropped to remove the pizza box.


----------



## bluescreen (Nov 18, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Where was that taken?
> 
> No good asking PA, he won’t recall.


St Tropez, 2007 - according to sources.
e2a  I did a google image search and came up with this trash from a year ago. Interesting though.
EXCLUSIVE: Prince Andrew's Australian lover speaks out


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Nov 18, 2019)

Mrs Miggins said:


> His teeth are really starting to frighten me.


His teeth look enormous - very odd.


----------



## bluescreen (Nov 18, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> St Tropez, 2007 - according to sources.
> e2a  I did a google image search and came up with this trash from a year ago. Interesting though.
> EXCLUSIVE: Prince Andrew's Australian lover speaks out


It's rank that the magazine refers to her as a 'lover' and as a 'teenage prostitute'. Really rank.


----------



## neonwilderness (Nov 18, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Horse faced cunt that he is
> 
> Sad to say I met him once


Did he take you to Pizza Express?


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Nov 18, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Horse faced cunt that he is
> 
> Sad to say I met him once


And? what was your impression?


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Nov 18, 2019)

neonwilderness said:


> Did he take you to Pizza Express?


No silly - he doesn't usually go to Pizza Express - that's why he remembers that particular trip there on that specific day.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 18, 2019)

Mrs Miggins said:


> No silly - he doesn't usually go to Pizza Express - that's why he remembers that particular trip there on that specific day.


It’s normally Nando’s.


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 18, 2019)

The Sydney Morning Herald’s take on all of this.



> Conspiracy theories are wild and silly, and the term is a pejorative one, associated with tin foil hats and people who pen intense letters in tiny scrawled handwriting.
> 
> But if 2019 has taught us anything, it is that conspiracy theories are just as likely to be true as not.



https://www.smh.com.au/politics/fed...es-are-likely-to-be-true-20191108-p538v7.html



> But there’s even more to it: Epstein was in jail, facing many more counts of procuring girls and underage prostitutes for sex, when he died.
> 
> His death was ruled a suicide but doubts have been raised. Last week an experienced forensic pathologist hired by Epstein’s brother found the deceased man's neck fractures were more consistent with homicidal strangulation than suicidal hanging.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 18, 2019)

pretty much everything this charmer has done will be documented because security. everything not behind closed doors that is, but the visitors will have been noted.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 18, 2019)

Andrew's favourite Wiley track:

What would we do 
Never buy drinks, never sweat, normally Nando’s


----------



## Badgers (Nov 18, 2019)

neonwilderness said:


> Did he take you to Pizza Express?


Sadly not  


Mrs Miggins said:


> And? what was your impression?


No different from the other royals I have met to be honest. 
Asked me what I do and shook my hand then went round the table.


----------



## elbows (Nov 18, 2019)

farmerbarleymow said:


> His teeth look enormous - very odd.



His teeth are normal size but the rest of him shrunk due to overuse of adrenaline suppositories.


----------



## bluescreen (Nov 18, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> The Sydney Morning Herald’s take on all of this.
> 
> https://www.smh.com.au/politics/fed...es-are-likely-to-be-true-20191108-p538v7.html


Blimey.


> This week, leaked footage from the United States showed a TV anchor for the ABC network in an “off-mic” moment, complaining bitterly that her story about accused serial paedophile Jeffrey Epstein (now deceased) was quashed by her editors following pressure from “the palace”. The network worried it would lose access to Wills and Kate, she said.


AH, found it. ABC stopped Epstein report 'amid Palace threats'


----------



## neonwilderness (Nov 18, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Asked me what I do and shook my hand then went round the table.


Who’s to say that it was his hand that you shook? It could have been anyone’s


----------



## JimW (Nov 18, 2019)

neonwilderness said:


> Who’s to say that it was his hand that you shook? It could have been anyone’s


Surprisingly dry and unclammy.


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Nov 18, 2019)

Are there any fans of RHLSTP on here and does anyone know what the redacted stuff about PA was in one of the episodes from a while back? I can't remember who it was. PM me if you know!


----------



## strung out (Nov 18, 2019)

Mrs Miggins said:


> Are there any fans of RHLSTP on here and does anyone know what the redacted stuff about PA was in one of the episodes from a while back? I can't remember who it was. PM me if you know!


It's available to monthly badgers. I cancelled my sub a while ago, so can't go back and listen


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Nov 18, 2019)

strung out said:


> It's available to monthly badgers. I cancelled my sub a while ago, so can't go back and listen


Arse. I kind of wanted to know at the time. Now I REALLY want to know!!


----------



## keybored (Nov 18, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I think we’re _supposed_ to say “alleged nonce”, but that’s a formality.


Surely "HRH nonce".


----------



## Celyn (Nov 18, 2019)

Nonce Andrew


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Nov 18, 2019)

HRH Nonce Andrew it is then.


----------



## fishfinger (Nov 18, 2019)

His Revolting Highnonce.


----------



## JimW (Nov 18, 2019)

Prince Nonce, like egg nog, thick and stomach-turning.


----------



## T & P (Nov 18, 2019)

I've just taken a look at the Tramp Members' Club website he's so fond of. I wish I hadn't...


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 18, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> Blimey.
> 
> AH, found it. ABC stopped Epstein report 'amid Palace threats'



Yeah, the ABC hot mic footage was leaked to Project Veritas (a whistleblower organisation) who released it.

I posted it earlier in this thread but here it is again:


----------



## fishfinger (Nov 18, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Yeah, the ABC hot mic footage was leaked to *Project Veritas* (a whistleblower organisation) who released it.


Project Veritas is a rightwing activist group, not a whistleblower organisation, supported by Donald Trump.

Project Veritas: how fake news prize went to rightwing group beloved by Trump


----------



## Argonia (Nov 18, 2019)

What a dirty fucker. What a fucking rotter.


----------



## neonwilderness (Nov 18, 2019)

Even after that car crash interview people are still trying to defend him 

GMB guest says 'child prostitution isn't paedophilia' in row over Prince Andrew


> "You all seem to have forgotten that Jeffrey Epstein, the offence for which he was charged and for which he was imprisoned, was for soliciting prostitution from minors," she said, defending Prince Andrew, the Duke of York, and his friendship with disgraced Epstein.
> 
> "That is not the same thing as paedophilia," she added.





> Lady C, also commented on why she believes Prince Andrew, 59, did not cut ties with Epstein, 66, who hanged himself in a New York jail in August.
> 
> She said: "He does things in the correct way. You dump people in person.


Apologist cunt


----------



## Badgers (Nov 18, 2019)

neonwilderness said:


> Who’s to say that it was his hand that you shook? It could have been anyone’s


I can't remember the humidity of the shake.

In my defence I was holding one of Lennox Lewis's boxing gloves in the other hand so it was a surreal moment.


----------



## neonwilderness (Nov 18, 2019)

Badgers said:


> I can't remember the humidity of the shake.
> 
> In my defence *I was holding one of Lennox Lewis's boxing gloves in the other hand *so it was a surreal moment.


A missed opportunity


----------



## Cid (Nov 18, 2019)

Duncan2 said:


> Its a bit surprising to me that,apparently,no one has made much,any, effort to interview Ghislaine.Probably too late now that she has seen how badly these exculpatory interviews can go.



Why would she accept?


----------



## Duncan2 (Nov 18, 2019)

Cid said:


> Why would she accept?


If she is allegedly involved in child-trafficking you might think that the authorities over here or across the pond could be in a position to force the issue.Even if that were not the case why did Andy volunteer albeit for a gentle grilling at the hands of Maitlis?Admittedly she might not be a reliable witness.


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 18, 2019)

fishfinger said:


> Project Veritas is a rightwing activist group, not a whistleblower organisation, supported by Donald Trump.
> 
> Project Veritas: how fake news prize went to rightwing group beloved by Trump



According to The Guardian, the holy script of course 

Project Veritas have done the world a service in releasing this footage, superb work.

Try not to get bogged down in the whole left/right divide.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 18, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> According to The Guardian, the holy script of course


How on Earth do you form the impression that people here are Guardian fans?  Jesus.  

I love your last sentence though, because you get it so badly wrong.


----------



## Cid (Nov 18, 2019)

Duncan2 said:


> If she is allegedly involved in child-trafficking you might think that the authorities over here or across the pond could be in a position to force the issue.Even if that were not the case why did Andy volunteer albeit for a gentle grilling at the hands of Maitlis?Admittedly she might not be a reliable witness.



I mean, police interviews, yeah - dunno enough to know how much of a grilling she has/hasn't got. But there's nothing to say she has to do a press interview. I don't know how intelligent she is... But it wouldn't take that much nouse for her to realise that she is very intricately wound up in Epstein's shit, and that there are many areas she could be tripped up on. Andrew conversely has always been a public persona, and public in a much deeper sense most other celebs... He's a part of 'The Crown', 8th in line to be head of state. Even if he wasn't a thick cunt, he'd have had to do this sooner or later. Maxwell I imagine sees her chance of fading (back) into wealthy obscurity. Which is a fuck of a lot more than she deserves, but I can see why she would just keep silent as long as she can.


----------



## belboid (Nov 18, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> According to The Guardian, the holy script of course
> 
> Project Veritas have done the world a service in releasing this footage, superb work.
> 
> Try not to get bogged down in the whole left/right divide.


It's hardly just the guardian, is it?  It's almost everyone bar far-right cranks.  They just make shit up.  eg

https://www.washingtonpost.com/inve...e335a-cfb6-11e7-9d3a-bcbe2af58c3a_story.html?


----------



## Wilf (Nov 18, 2019)

Sweet FA said:


> Have we had this one yet?
> 
> View attachment 190315


TBF, she's just comforting him over his inability to sweat. And he's looking forward to a future where he will sweat profusely. About 10 minutes after the interview aired.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 18, 2019)

Mrs Miggins said:


> His teeth are really starting to frighten me.


I hope that one of them contains a cyanide capsule - and that he grinds his teeth.


----------



## JimW (Nov 18, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Try not to get bogged down in the whole left/right divide.


You solved that one by falling down a right wing loon rabbit hole, you plum.


----------



## fishfinger (Nov 18, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Try not to get bogged down in the whole left/right divide.


Good people on both sides, eh?


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 18, 2019)

Cid said:


> Maxwell I imagine sees her chance of fading (back) into wealthy obscurity. Which is a fuck of a lot more than she deserves, but I can see why she would just keep silent as long as she can.



Unless she’s already dead or been suicided like Epstein.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 18, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> That’s not how he dresses in London. And it probably isn’t his hand: he doesn’t touch people.


As they won't be getting any more £billion gifts, the DUP are marketing an inflatable 'Prince Andrew Red Hand'. Ideal gift for Loyalist nonces and each one comes with a discounted pizza.


----------



## elbows (Nov 18, 2019)

fishfinger said:


> Good people on both sides, eh?



The Andrew defence could be used here. The divide is a staircase, and I cannot be right wing because I've never been upstairs.


----------



## Celyn (Nov 18, 2019)

Cid said:


> I mean, police interviews, yeah - dunno enough to know how much of a grilling she has/hasn't got. But there's nothing to say she has to do a press interview. I don't know how intelligent she is... But it wouldn't take that much nouse for her to realise that she is very intricately wound up in Epstein's shit, and that there are many areas she could be tripped up on...



Being the daughter of Robert Maxwell, she might have a tiny clue what the press is like.


----------



## JimW (Nov 18, 2019)

Wilf said:


> As they won't be getting any more £billion gifts, the DUP are marketing an inflatable 'Prince Andrew Red Hand'. Ideal gift for Loyalist nonces and each one comes with a discounted pizza.


Also a handy source of running water if you ever have problems with your pipes.


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 18, 2019)

fishfinger said:


> Good people on both sides, eh?





But you’ve chosen your side, right soldier?


----------



## brogdale (Nov 18, 2019)

Celyn said:


> Being the daughter of Robert Maxwell, she might have a tiny clue what the press is like.


Might also be able to extoll the joys of sailing private cruise yachts to Prince nonce.


----------



## tim (Nov 18, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Now then. He does that _for us_ in his tireless role as roving business envoy. Nothing more honourable than to sacrifice oneself for one's country. And remember, _he was shot at_ in the Falklands.
> 
> _Honourable_ and _Falklands_, now can we just leave this now???


They shoud have shot his malvinas off!


----------



## Celyn (Nov 18, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Might also be able to extoll the joys of sailing private cruise yachts to Prince nonce.


Well, just the occasional relaxing cruise. No need to go overboard.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 18, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Might also be able to extoll the joys of sailing private cruise yachts to Prince nonce.


A one-way ticket to the south atlantic industrial zone


----------



## Celyn (Nov 18, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Unless she’s already dead or been suicided like Epstein.



Didn't Virginia Roberts accept some kind of "don't talk about me" payment from Ghislaine Maxwell?


----------



## neonwilderness (Nov 18, 2019)




----------



## TopCat (Nov 18, 2019)

T & P said:


> I've just taken a look at the Tramp Members' Club website he's so fond of. I wish I hadn't...


Do the rich dance well?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 18, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Do the rich dance well?


Depends how much they want food.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 18, 2019)

T & P said:


> I've just taken a look at the Tramp Members' Club website he's so fond of. I wish I hadn't...


I looked after reading this. They seem like cunts. Their membership list will be handy CTR.


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 18, 2019)

Celyn said:


> Didn't Virginia Roberts accept some kind of "don't talk about me" payment from Ghislaine Maxwell?



Haven’t heard of that till now but it wouldn’t surprise me.


----------



## JimW (Nov 18, 2019)

Celyn said:


> Well, just the occasional relaxing cruise. No need to go overboard.


The front page splash we'd all like to see.


----------



## elbows (Nov 18, 2019)

KPMG ends sponsorship of Prince Andrew's scheme



> KPMG has not renewed its sponsorship of the Duke of York's entrepreneurship scheme.
> 
> The accountancy firm is thought to have made the decision at the end of October, when its sponsorship of Pitch@Palace ended.
> 
> The controversy over the duke's ties to the convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein is understood to have been one reason behind the move.





> Meanwhile, University of Huddersfield students discussed a motion to put pressure on the duke to resign as chancellor on Monday evening. Their decision will be announced in the coming days.
> 
> In response, the university itself said Prince Andrew's "enthusiasm for innovation and entrepreneurship" was a "natural fit" with its work.



Meanwhile, the University of Shuddersfield revealed that his enthusiasm for innovation in the field of child sex exploitation was a natural fit for the shit, a universal credit to the nation.


----------



## fishfinger (Nov 18, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> But you’ve chosen your side, right soldier?


I'm no soldier, and unlike you, I have chosen not to support the far right.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 18, 2019)

JimW said:


> The front page splash we'd all like to see.


Is it too soon to be thinking about pitching Celebrity Nonce Island? All the peados and their fixers complete for ever shrinking survival rations, with evermore painful and humiliating daily tasks. Last nonce standing wins the Michael Jackson Trophy before being shot.


----------



## Celyn (Nov 18, 2019)

I cannot now recall where I read about Virginia Roberts Giuffre and Ghislaine Maxwell and money. With some slapping of my head, I think it's possible that I am getting confused with this, from Wiki



> Giuffre sued Maxwell in federal court in the Southern District of New York in 2015. She asserted that Maxwell and Epstein had trafficked her and other underage girls, often at sex parties hosted by Epstein at his homes in New York, New Mexico, Palm Beach, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Maxwell called her a liar. Giuffre sued Maxwell for defamation. While details of the settlement have not been made public, in May 2017 the case was settled in Giuffre's favour,[39] with Maxwell paying Giuffre "millions".[40]



Ghislaine Maxwell - Wikipedia

But I know I didn't read it on Wiki - it was on some newspaper site. The newspaper may have doing doing a garbled version of the Wiki story.  I'm sure I will suddenly remember where I read it at about 3 in the morning about 4 weeks from now, 'cos that's how things work.  

Apologies, therefore, if I got it wrong, and I think I probably did.


----------



## Celyn (Nov 18, 2019)

elbows said:


> KPMG ends sponsorship of Prince Andrew's scheme...
> Meanwhile, the University of Shuddersfield revealed that his enthusiasm for innovation in the field of child sex exploitation was a natural fit for the shit, a universal credit to the nation.



I will never understand the sheer brown-nosing crawly-ness of universities making someone Chancellor who has never otherwise qualified to darken the door of any university.


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 18, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Is it too soon to be thinking about pitching Celebrity Nonce Island? All the peados and their fixers complete for ever shrinking survival rations, with evermore painful and humiliating daily tasks. Last nonce standing wins the Michael Jackson Trophy before being shot.


I'm a Child Celebrity Get Me Out Of Here!


----------



## elbows (Nov 18, 2019)

Celyn said:


> I will never understand the sheer brown-nosing crawly-ness of universities making someone Chancellor who has never otherwise qualified to darken the door of any university.



Prestige trade, the grubby like their prestige masks, and the markup. Value added to the letterhead. The family shield made real.


----------



## killer b (Nov 18, 2019)

Celyn said:


> I will never understand the sheer brown-nosing crawly-ness of universities making someone Chancellor who has never otherwise qualified to darken the door of any university.


It isn't brown nosing crawliness, it's paying them to use their contacts / profile on behalf of the university. Cash for access.


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 18, 2019)

fishfinger said:


> I'm no soldier, and unlike you, I have chosen not to support the far right.





Project Veritas isn’t far right you absolute lunatic.


----------



## belboid (Nov 18, 2019)

Duncan2 said:


> If she is allegedly involved in child-trafficking you might think that the authorities over here or across the pond could be in a position to force the issue.Even if that were not the case why did Andy volunteer albeit for a gentle grilling at the hands of Maitlis?Admittedly she might not be a reliable witness.


No solicitor worth a penny would say anything to her except 'do not say a word to anyone ever again if you can possibly avoid it.'  And she isn't a fully paid for member of the royal family, so has no other public roles to fulfil.


----------



## belboid (Nov 18, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Project Veritas isn’t far right you absolute lunatic.


yes it is you buffoon.  Far-right, makes shit up, by fuckwits for fuckwits.


----------



## fishfinger (Nov 18, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Project Veritas isn’t far right you absolute lunatic.


Have you seen who backs them?


----------



## Celyn (Nov 18, 2019)

re. G. Maxwell and V., Roberts and money. I find this from the "Times", but I am sure that's not where I read it either.


> A case brought by Virginia Roberts Giuffre, the Epstein victim who alleged that she was lent to Prince Andrew for abuse, was settled out of court in 2015.
> 
> Where is Ghislaine Maxwell? Search is on for Jeffrey Epstein’s loyal ‘madam’However, the sealed documents were released earlier this year after Epstein’s arrest for sex trafficking, bringing Ms Maxwell back into the spotlight.



Meh. Time to eat, probably.

My only point is about the question of why we aren't hearing much about Ghislaine Maxwell, and would she have done herself in having already invested money in saving her skin?

Come to think of it, how did GM get to be all that rich? Unless she was securely rich before her father went for his big swim.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 18, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Project Veritas isn’t far right you absolute lunatic.


So far you’re backing Project Veritas and David Icke. You’re a twat.


----------



## MickiQ (Nov 18, 2019)

It's worth checking out the Google Reviews of Woking Piazza Express for a laugh though I suspect the staff there are cursing his name by now.
if he had tried to brazen it out at the beginning and said "Yes I had sex with her but  I swear she told me she was 18, I'm a Prince women throw themselves at me all the time, why would I suspect she was coerced?", then there would be plenty of condemnation but there would be a lot of people making excuses for him as well.
His sheer arrogance in seeming to believe that just because he is a Royal, people should just swallow whatever guff he spouts is amazing and gave us this awesome interview.


----------



## maomao (Nov 18, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Project Veritas isn’t far right you absolute lunatic.



Some people here are confused as to whether you're actually far right yourself or just a complete and utter fuckwit. We're just considering those two options though because there aren't any other likely explanations.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 18, 2019)

maomao said:


> Some people here are confused as to whether you're actually far right yourself or just a complete and utter fuckwit. We're just considering those two options though because there aren't any other likely explanations.



I was expecting this one to break cover as some kind of right wing nutcase eventually, but my money was on Faragian headbanger not Ickean crypto-fascist. Takes all sorts I suppose.


----------



## T & P (Nov 18, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Do the rich dance well?


They certainly like to dance with señoritas who could be their daughters if not granddaughters, judging by the promo video...


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 18, 2019)

Celyn said:


> re. G. Maxwell and V., Roberts and money. I find this from the "Times", but I am sure that's not where I read it either.
> 
> 
> Meh. Time to eat, probably.
> ...




I read that she was skint after Bob went splash and Epstein bankrolled her. That was what their relationship was based on.


----------



## tim (Nov 18, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Is it too soon to be thinking about pitching Celebrity Nonce Island? All the peados and their fixers complete for ever shrinking survival rations, with evermore painful and humiliating daily tasks. Last nonce standing wins the Michael Jackson Trophy before being shot.




Catering by and sponsorship from  West End Restaurant Sticky Fingers.







Sticky Fingers


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 18, 2019)

Sweet FA said:


> Have we had this one yet?
> 
> View attachment 190315


I know this isn't the most important thing but what the fuck is that shirt, it's the colour of milky baby shit, absolutely horrific


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 18, 2019)

It is, tbf, a paedophile's shirt


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 18, 2019)

Celyn said:


> re. G. Maxwell and V., Roberts and money. I find this from the "Times", but I am sure that's not where I read it either.
> 
> 
> Meh. Time to eat, probably.
> ...



Either inherited cash or/and ‘working’ for Epstein.

I’ve read something about her or Epstein individually or both working for Mossad but that may be a step too far into the  tinfoil world.

Maxwell will no doubt have gained her foothold access to the elite circles off her fathers fame tho.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 18, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> I’ve read something about her or Epstein individually or both working for Mossad but that may be a step too far into the  tinfoil world



Fucks sake


----------



## IC3D (Nov 18, 2019)

Why do you care about this.
Women get exploited by w/c men all the time.
It seems mild relatively.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 18, 2019)

IC3D said:


> Why do you care about this.
> Women get exploited by w/c men all the time.
> It seems mild relatively.


Edgy


----------



## kenny g (Nov 18, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> I’ve read something about her or Epstein individually or both working for Mossad but that may be a step too far into the  tinfoil world.


  Just a step. Maxwell Snr was definitely a MOSSAD agent though. This book published by the widely respected authors guild publishing house confirms as much: Martin Dillon - The Assassination of Robert Maxwell: Israel's Superspy


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 18, 2019)

I had intended to avoid watching this interview, but because of all the media coverage & this thread going nuts, I decided to watch it, IMO it wasn't the car crash I had expected.

It was a fucking juggernaut crash.


----------



## circleline (Nov 18, 2019)

No sweat..? At this year's Trooping the Colour, in the height of summer:

Also, the birthday party at Pizza Express, Woking (alibi).  Akin to saying: ask my (then 12 year old) daughter and her mates


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 18, 2019)

Looks like the fallout has begun.

KPMG ends sponsorship of Prince Andrew's scheme


----------



## belboid (Nov 18, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> I had intended to avoid watching this interview, but because of all the media coverage & this thread going nuts, I decided to watch it, IMO it wasn't the car crash I had expected.
> 
> It was a fucking juggernaut crash.


"I expected a train wreck. That was a plane crashing into an oil tanker, causing a tsunami, triggering a nuclear explosion level bad."


----------



## Duncan2 (Nov 18, 2019)

belboid said:


> No solicitor worth a penny would say anything to her except 'do not say a word to anyone ever again if you can possibly avoid it.'  And she isn't a fully paid for member of the royal family, so has no other public roles to fulfil.


They have ways of making you talk.


----------



## Ted Striker (Nov 18, 2019)




----------



## Louis MacNeice (Nov 18, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Project Veritas isn’t far right you *absolute lunatic*.



Absolute lunatic..yep that about sums it up...keep on taking those self awareness tablets.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## steveo87 (Nov 18, 2019)




----------



## MickiQ (Nov 18, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> I had intended to avoid watching this interview, but because of all the media coverage & this thread going nuts, I decided to watch it, IMO it wasn't the car crash I had expected.
> 
> It was a fucking juggernaut crash.


it was fucking awesome wasn't it


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 18, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> it was fucking awesome wasn't it



I was half expecting Maitlis to just blurt out ‘OH, COME ON’ at some point.


----------



## Idris2002 (Nov 18, 2019)

Re: the Ghis creature. Looks like someone's instructing her lawyers:


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Nov 18, 2019)

.


----------



## dessiato (Nov 18, 2019)

(I used to go to his house as part of my job)


----------



## fishfinger (Nov 18, 2019)

dessiato said:


> (I used to go to his house as part of my job)


I hadn't realised that you were a sex worker!


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Nov 18, 2019)

fishfinger said:


> I hadn't realised that you were a sex worker!



Pimp


----------



## clicker (Nov 18, 2019)

Butler.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 18, 2019)

Fluffer


----------



## brogdale (Nov 18, 2019)

Groom of the stool.


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 18, 2019)

Idris2002 said:


> Re: the Ghis creature. Looks like someone's instructing her lawyers:



They want names then.

Good.


----------



## Saunders (Nov 18, 2019)

Celyn said:


> Didn't Virginia Roberts accept some kind of "don't talk about me" payment from Ghislaine Maxwell?


So what if she did?


----------



## Cid (Nov 18, 2019)

dessiato said:


> (I used to go to his house as part of my job)



And you never managed to accidentally set him on fire?

Disappointed dess, disappointed.


----------



## dessiato (Nov 18, 2019)

Cid said:


> And you never managed to accidentally set him on fire?
> 
> Disappointed dess, disappointed.


Never properly met except in passing.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 18, 2019)

dessiato said:


> Never properly met except in passing.


So what accidents did you investigate there?


----------



## Celyn (Nov 18, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> I had intended to avoid watching this interview, but because of all the media coverage & this thread going nuts, I decided to watch it, IMO it wasn't the car crash I had expected.
> 
> It was a fucking juggernaut crash.


I have not watched it. There's a problem about how much data I can use per month and what money that involves, plus I would only ever like to hear a thing if I can have subtitles at the same time.

So, in your careful and considered judgement, cupid_stunt, it is a thing worth seeing?  Yep, I will have a go at watching it. I do realise I miss some things by only *reading* news, and watching that criminal arrogant abusive lout worry and learn to sweat again might be worth it.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 18, 2019)

circleline said:


> No sweat..? At this year's Trooping the Colour, in the height of summer:
> 
> Also, the birthday party at Pizza Express, Woking (alibi).  Akin to saying: ask my (then 12 year old) daughter and her mates


What an abject cu t he is.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 18, 2019)

belboid said:


> "I expected a train wreck. That was a plane crashing into an oil tanker, causing a tsunami, triggering a nuclear explosion level bad."


It was fantastic.  I have worked to undermine this fuck and his family for near 40 years. It was great to see him cut at himself and his friends and loved ones wiithout outside intervention required.  Brilliant. Ring the bells.


----------



## bluescreen (Nov 18, 2019)

Celyn said:


> I have not watched it. There's a problem about how much data I can use per month and what money that involves, plus I would only ever like to hear a thing if I can have subtitles at the same time.
> 
> So, in your careful and considered judgement, cupid_stunt, it is a thing worth seeing?  Yep, I will have a go at watching it. I do realise I miss some things by only *reading* news, and watching that criminal arrogant abusive lout worry and learn to sweat again might be worth it.


To save your data consumption, there's a transcript (with some analysis) here: Statement Analysis ®: Statement Analysis: Prince Andrew Interview


----------



## gosub (Nov 18, 2019)

Well I feel sorry for him. His bestt mate has recently topped himself. If he hadn't taken time out of his busy schedule , that close friend  -who was clearly  going through a difficult time , might have succumbed to his dark suicidal thoughts far sooner. Gawd bless him


----------



## TopCat (Nov 18, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> it was fucking awesome wasn't it


To br fair she was totally up his arse until it got stupid.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 18, 2019)

gosub said:


> Well I feel sorry for him. His bestt mate has recently topped himself. If he hadn't taken time out of his busy schedule , that close friend  -who was clearly  going through a difficult time , might have succumbed to his dark suicidal thoughts far sooner. Gawd bless him


Shall we do a collection?


----------



## TopCat (Nov 18, 2019)

Still heading BBC rolling news.


----------



## UrbaneFox (Nov 18, 2019)

https://www.tramp.co.uk/events

The Tramp Winter Wonderland is opening soon. Christmas jumpers encouraged! 

Remember, book early


----------



## gosub (Nov 18, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Shall we do a collection?


Has his stock sunk so low that one has to ask


----------



## editor (Nov 18, 2019)

The Channel 4 docu is ladelling on the guilt to sweaty Andy. 

The Prince and the Paedophile documentary examines Epstein's royal relationship


----------



## TopCat (Nov 18, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> The fuck have you got against kimono dragons?


They look weird


----------



## friedaweed (Nov 18, 2019)

TopCat said:


> They look weird


So do the Windsor's


----------



## TopCat (Nov 19, 2019)

friedaweed said:


> So do the Windsor's


True


----------



## Humberto (Nov 19, 2019)

So Andrew is a [no, ed]


----------



## dessiato (Nov 19, 2019)

Humberto said:


> So Andrew is -------.


Allegedly.


----------



## dessiato (Nov 19, 2019)




----------



## Wilf (Nov 19, 2019)

dessiato said:


> Allegedly.


I used the same word myself earlier in the thread, with a bit of regard for the site. However I don't get a sense that the mods are too worried about observing those niceties in this case, though they'll let us know if they have any worries. In terms of using the 'allegedly' out of respect for the accused and the thought that he might be innocent, I think we are way beyond that. Particularly after last night. fuck him.


----------



## dessiato (Nov 19, 2019)

BBC News - Prince Andrew: KPMG ends sponsorship of royal's scheme
KPMG ends sponsorship of Prince Andrew's scheme


----------



## editor (Nov 19, 2019)

Humberto said:


> So Andrew is a [no:ed]


Come on. You KNOW you can't type this kind of thing up, FFS.


----------



## dessiato (Nov 19, 2019)

BBC News - Prince Andrew: Royalty has failed Epstein's accusers, says lawyer
Epstein's accusers 'failed by royalty' - lawyer


----------



## editor (Nov 19, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I used the same word myself earlier in the thread, with a bit of regard for the site. However I don't get a sense that the mods are too worried about observing those niceties in this case, though they'll let us know if they have any worries. In terms of using the 'allegedly' out of respect for the accused and the thought that he might be innocent, I think we are way beyond that. Particularly after last night. fuck him.


Adding 'allegedly' doesn't actually work like something people think it does and anyone posting up legally unsupported accusations is going to piss off the mods.


----------



## Celyn (Nov 19, 2019)

Saunders said:


> So what if she did?


I don't suggest it was in any way bad of her. My comments were to do with the matter of why Ghislaine Maxwell is not, at present, being a person of interest to lawyers.


----------



## krtek a houby (Nov 19, 2019)

Allegedly despicable man who has allegedly shown no remorse. But then, allegedly, royalty has been using and abusing the people for centuries.


----------



## neonwilderness (Nov 19, 2019)




----------



## Celyn (Nov 19, 2019)

Oh! I have now watched the thing.     He is so arrogantly vile. O ye gods, he is the most full-of-himself arrogant useless bit of slimey nonsense.   

I would very much like to hear (although they probably may not speak) from Nonce Andrew's comrades in the Falklands, or anyway in the Navy. I have an impression that he was not thought of very well.


----------



## Celyn (Nov 19, 2019)

Saunders said:


> So what if she did?


I have made other replies to this.


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 19, 2019)

I doubt anything will come of this or even get a response from PA.

Alleged Jeffrey Epstein victim calls on Prince Andrew to speak to US law officials


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 19, 2019)

.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 19, 2019)

Celyn said:


> Oh! I have now watched the thing.     He is so arrogantly vile. O ye gods, he is the most full-of-himself arrogant useless bit of slimey nonsense.
> 
> I would very much like to hear (although they probably may not speak) from Nonce Andrew's comrades in the Falklands, or anyway in the Navy. I have an impression that he was not thought of very well.


 
My father was of the impression that his tour of duty schedule didn’t make things easier for the rest of the expeditionary forces. Seems to have been widely held amongst people involved in the south Atlantic


----------



## krtek a houby (Nov 19, 2019)

Also contemptible if true

Prince Andrew used the N-word, former No 10 aide claims


----------



## Badgers (Nov 19, 2019)

Forgot about this 

Duchess of York admits Duke arranged for convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein to pay off her debts


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Nov 19, 2019)

Celyn said:


> Oh! I have now watched the thing.     He is so arrogantly vile. O ye gods, he is the most full-of-himself arrogant useless bit of slimey nonsense.
> 
> I would very much like to hear (although they probably may not speak) from Nonce Andrew's comrades in the Falklands, or anyway in the Navy. I have an impression that he was not thought of very well.



The post below is from an interesting twitter thread.  To say he was hated in the navy would be an understatement, at least based on the contributors to the thread.


teqniq said:


> View attachment 190234
> 
> You'd think maybe, just maybe there might be one person who had something good to say about him but judging by the comments underneath this tweet he has been universaly loathed by anyone who had dealings with him.



You can find the thread here.


----------



## emanymton (Nov 19, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Forgot about this
> 
> Duchess of York admits Duke arranged for convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein to pay off her debts


I find this so odd. £15k is nothing to these people.


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 19, 2019)

emanymton said:


> I find this so odd.



Which part of all this do you find sane?


----------



## TopCat (Nov 19, 2019)

emanymton said:


> I find this so odd. £15k is nothing to these people.


Actual cash is hard for the likes of Fergie to locate and appropriate. Like Russian aristo's  after the glorious revolution, they go where the money is. Epstein's money is hard to justify. Where did he get it? How did he get it? Who did he spend it on?


----------



## klang (Nov 19, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> .


it will be hard to find even the smallest grain of truth in this interview.


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Nov 19, 2019)

farmerbarleymow said:


> You can find the thread here.


This one made me laugh 
_"I met too met Prince Charles, he was engaging, interesting, polite and he took time out to talk to us, unlike his brother who to be frank is a knobhead."_


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Nov 19, 2019)

littleseb said:


> it will be hard to find even the smallest grain of truth in this interview.


We established earlier in the thread that he probably genuinely doesn't know where the bar is in Tramp.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 19, 2019)

Mrs Miggins said:


> We established earlier in the thread that he probably genuinely doesn't know where the bar is in Tramp.


or the toilets.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 19, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Actual cash is hard for the likes of Fergie to locate and appropriate. Like Russian aristo's  after the glorious revolution, they go where the money is. Epstein's money is hard to justify. Where did he get it? How did he get it? Who did he spend it on?



Seems like his main line of work was bilking other shady billionaires by masquerading as a 'wealth manager' or something. I wouldn't be at all surprised if he'd made a few bob from extortion on the side.


----------



## bluescreen (Nov 19, 2019)

Two prison guards who were supposed to be watching Epstein on suicide watch have been arrested.
Jeffrey Epstein: two New York prison guards to be charged

Apologies, this is a better link with more info. Seems like the footsoldiers are being blamed rather than the generals, as usual. Jeffrey Epstein Suicide: Two Jail Workers Expected to Be Charged


----------



## Argonia (Nov 19, 2019)

Oh the grand old Duke of York/He had 10,000 alibis


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 19, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Actual cash is hard for the likes of Fergie to locate and appropriate. Like Russian aristo's  after the glorious revolution, they go where the money is. Epstein's money is hard to justify. Where did he get it? How did he get it? Who did he spend it on?



Blackmail.

The big question is who ordered the fake suicide on Epstein?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 19, 2019)

Sunninghill Park - Wikipedia

He would make a good estate agent judging by his past deals


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 19, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Blackmail.
> 
> The big question is who ordered the fake suicide on Epstein?



The lizard people, obviously.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 19, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> The lizard people, obviously.


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 19, 2019)

Who on earth is this Lady Colin Campbell woman who is supporting PA on GMB?


----------



## Badgers (Nov 19, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> Two prison guards who were supposed to be watching Epstein on suicide watch have been arrested.
> Jeffrey Epstein: two New York prison guards to be charged
> 
> Apologies, this is a better link with more info. Seems like the footsoldiers are being blamed rather than the generals, as usual. Jeffrey Epstein Suicide: Two Jail Workers Expected to Be Charged


Can of worms opening?


----------



## A380 (Nov 19, 2019)




----------



## Badgers (Nov 19, 2019)

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-50470890


> Standard Chartered has become the second corporate partner to sever ties with the Duke of York's business mentoring initiative, Pitch@Palace.


----------



## neonwilderness (Nov 19, 2019)




----------



## Marty1 (Nov 19, 2019)




----------



## krtek a houby (Nov 19, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Who will play him in the Crown telly series?



Kevin Spacey To Play Prince Andrew In Season 4 Of ‘The Crown’


----------



## existentialist (Nov 20, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Blackmail.
> 
> The big question is who ordered the fake suicide on Epstein?


That might be *your* big question. Mine is currently "How did I end up with two jars of brinjal chutney in the cupboard?"


----------



## dessiato (Nov 20, 2019)

BBC News - Prince Andrew: Standard Chartered bank cuts ties with duke's scheme
Bank cuts ties with Prince Andrew scheme

Another one. He's becoming toxic.


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Nov 20, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> or the toilets.


The groom of the stool would sort that out.  Presumably follows him around with a bucket.


----------



## Raheem (Nov 20, 2019)

farmerbarleymow said:


> The groom of the stool would sort that out.  Presumably follows him around with a bucket.


Although occasionally told "Actually, I don't think I'm going to need you on this trip".


----------



## extra dry (Nov 20, 2019)

more interviewing and info.


----------



## MrSki (Nov 20, 2019)




----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 20, 2019)

^room next door is one of the funniest things on the internet


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 20, 2019)

farmerbarleymow said:


> The groom of the stool would sort that out.  Presumably follows him around with a bucket.


And dump it over him periodically


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 20, 2019)

existentialist said:


> That might be *your* big question. Mine is currently "How did I end up with two jars of brinjal chutney in the cupboard?"


Mine is why is there a door more than six feet off the ground at work


----------



## existentialist (Nov 20, 2019)

dessiato said:


> BBC News - Prince Andrew: Standard Chartered bank cuts ties with duke's scheme
> Bank cuts ties with Prince Andrew scheme
> 
> Another one. He's becoming toxic.


This will snowball. The more that cut ties, the faster the rest will. He's going to be a pariah in fairly short order.

I can see him ending up with Phil The Greek as his personal chauffeur.


----------



## existentialist (Nov 20, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Mine is why is there a door more than six feet off the ground at work


That's probably a better question than mine, if only because the scope for a straightforward answer to yours is more limited. But they're still both better questions than our resident clown's.


----------



## Chilli.s (Nov 20, 2019)

If I was ceo of the publicly funded royal family, I'd be seriously pissed off and on the hunt to cut out the dead wood that allowed this fiasco.


----------



## Chilli.s (Nov 20, 2019)

Suppose this is what happens when all the advisors are acquired through nepotism and the old boy network.


----------



## existentialist (Nov 20, 2019)

Now BT.

BT says it will not work with company linked to Prince Andrew


----------



## Argonia (Nov 20, 2019)

Haha. His position as a so-called 'working royal' is up the creek.


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Nov 20, 2019)

working royal

An oxymoron if ever there was one.


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 20, 2019)

Argonia said:


> Haha. His position as a so-called 'working royal' is up the creek.



He still gets £249,000 a year allowance off mummy tho.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 20, 2019)

BT refuses to work with firm tied to Prince Andrew


----------



## neonwilderness (Nov 20, 2019)

Argonia said:


> Haha. His position as a so-called 'working royal' is up the creek.


Careers | Jobs | PizzaExpress

There's a few vacancies at Woking


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 20, 2019)

ElizabethofYork said:


> working royal
> 
> An oxymoron if ever there was one.


when he returns to the falklands you'll see a real working royal until he expires of exhaustion


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 20, 2019)

Chilli.s said:


> If I was ceo of the publicly funded royal family, I'd be seriously pissed off and on the hunt to cut out the dead wood that allowed this fiasco.


i picture the quorn pursuing andrew across the countryside


----------



## Chilli.s (Nov 20, 2019)

With a pack of attack corgis.


----------



## Argonia (Nov 20, 2019)

I live in Woking. I don't want him anywhere near the place.


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Nov 20, 2019)

Perhaps he could get a job here - it's got a nice royal sound to it.


----------



## JimW (Nov 20, 2019)

He'll have to live off the sweat of his brow now... oh.


----------



## neonwilderness (Nov 20, 2019)

Argonia said:


> I live in Woking. I don't want him anywhere near the place.


His inability to sweat would make him ideal for working in the kitchen.


----------



## Zapp Brannigan (Nov 20, 2019)

neonwilderness said:


> Careers | Jobs | PizzaExpress
> 
> There's a few vacancies at Woking



Mysteriously, any employees dating back to 2001 have recently disappeared


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Nov 20, 2019)

"I'll deal with this", says Brenda


----------



## ska invita (Nov 20, 2019)




----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 20, 2019)

I love Kathy Burke.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 20, 2019)

Palace and Creepy Andy can't get their stories straight: Letter casts doubt on when prince met Epstein


----------



## andysays (Nov 20, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Palace and Creepy Andy can't get their stories straight: Letter casts doubt on when prince met Epstein


I bet he'd remember if they'd met in Pizza Express


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 20, 2019)

andysays said:


> I bet he'd remember if they'd met in Pizza Express


Yeah, no sweat.


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 20, 2019)

neonwilderness said:


> Careers | Jobs | PizzaExpress
> 
> There's a few vacancies at Woking



Prince Andrew to work in a pizza shop?

Utter noncesense.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 20, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Yeah, no sweat.


I think it's the public/private thing, whereby the royals don't get to live the carefree life the rest of us have. For example, Andrew has to remain completely arid in public and can only sweat in brief private moments. Similarly, Prince Philip only has the chance to be a multicultural anti-racist away from the cameras.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 20, 2019)

Gawd, he's not going to do another interview is he? He won't, I know. But _please _make it happen - I'll even agree to go and vote next month if providence/the universe/deity x can deliver this.


----------



## LDC (Nov 20, 2019)

Stepping back from all public life according to Radio 4 just now. Ha.


----------



## belboid (Nov 20, 2019)

ha!
Prince Andrew scaling back on royal duties


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 20, 2019)

Commonly known as running away.


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 20, 2019)

He’s advertising for a project assistant.

Project Assistant - Technology - The Royal Household


----------



## killer b (Nov 20, 2019)

Lib dems are going to be very fucked off with this dominating the evening news instead of their manifesto launch. Gutted.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 20, 2019)

belboid said:


> ha!
> Prince Andrew scaling back on royal duties


The grand auld Duke of York


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 20, 2019)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Stepping back from all public life according to Radio 4 just now. Ha.


He will be embarking for the saiz this very night


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Nov 20, 2019)

Just watching Sky News  sycophantic royal correspondent calling old Porky's decision as "brave".  Yuk.


----------



## friedaweed (Nov 20, 2019)

killer b said:


> Lib dems are going to be very fucked off with this dominating the evening news instead of their manifesto launch. Gutted.




Time for Phil the Greek to get back behind the wheel again...


----------



## Shirl (Nov 20, 2019)

I wonder who wrote that for him. The last paragraph is very much at odds with what he was saying in _that_ interview.


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 20, 2019)

Shirl said:


> I wonder who wrote that for him. The last paragraph is very much at odds with what he was saying in _that_ interview.



Paul Burrell?


----------



## weltweit (Nov 20, 2019)

I found the interview excruciating partly because of the hints at how the other half live, "just an ordinary shooting weekend" or addressing his wife as "the Duchess", Epstein's many houses as "just convenient places to stay", and that he pretty much excused Epstein's paedophilia and didn't regret being friends with him because he opened lots of doors to the famous and well heeled. He has no clue how ordinary people live.

"Perhaps I am just too honourable" - what an amazingly arrogant thing to say in the context of underage girls being trafficked and abused.

And not a peep of concern or even sympathy about the victims. The photo denial (never been upstairs), the sweating just bizzare. I expect there will be fact checking going on about pizza dates and the like.

I am not surprised corporate Britain is disassociating itself, the idea a prince front an entrepreneurs entity is odd in any case. (That said the PYBT which was Charles' thing seemed quite good).

I thought Emily Maitliss got the balance about right, she didn't need to press, because he hung himself quite adequately and every right thinking person will know that an unprovable claim not to know where the bar is in the Tramp nightclub is a pretty weak defence against any charge.

Whether he gives evidence under oath to anyone or not I doubt Andrew will be travelling to the USA again any time soon.


----------



## Detroit City (Nov 20, 2019)

looks like the paedo is "stepping back" from his royal duties indefinitely. 

that'll give him more time to find some more underage victims


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 20, 2019)

weltweit said:


> I found the interview excruciating partly because of the hints at how the other half live, "just an ordinary shooting weekend" or addressing his wife as "the Duchess", Epstein's many houses as "just convenient places to stay", and that he pretty much excused Epstein's paedophilia and didn't regret being friends with him because he opened lots of doors to the famous and well heeled. He has no clue how ordinary people live.
> 
> "Perhaps I am just too honourable" - what an amazingly arrogant thing to say in the context of underage girls being trafficked and abused.
> 
> ...


If he travels to America he may find he's there some time


----------



## Buckaroo (Nov 20, 2019)

belboid said:


> ha!
> Prince Andrew scaling back on royal duties



The scales help prevent the loss of body moisture in reptiles like lizards. Just saying. Join the dots etc. And all this guff about Maitliss like she's Columbo or the Spanish Inquisition. She could have said random words and he'd have fucked up, he's an idiot.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 20, 2019)

Detroit City said:


> looks like the paedo is "stepping back" from his royal duties indefinitely.
> 
> that'll give him more time to find some more underage victims


Yeh he's quitting to spend more time perving


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 20, 2019)

So you avoided killing yourself in the falklands then? You need to keep occupied so I am making up a job for you

Yes mum


Charity and shit. You don’t have to do fuck all. I’ll chuck in a car and a banging crib or two and cover any school fees for kids snd shit. Just don’t fuck it up. Understand you sweaty fuck?

Yes mum , of course. You can trust me .  I’m a safe pair of hands.

Leaves room


Fucks up


----------



## maomao (Nov 20, 2019)

Would rather he retired from life than public life.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 20, 2019)

It's an utter humiliation for the queen as well as her vile son


----------



## andysays (Nov 20, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> It's an utter humiliation for the queen as well as her vile son


Wonder what she'll say about it in her speech this Xmas


----------



## JimW (Nov 20, 2019)

Well, I hope you're all satisfied now, bullying an _honourable_ man into retirement. How will the country even carry on without him? At least we have the next generation of parasites to swan around like a DPRK general with a chestful of unearned tin on public occasions.


----------



## maomao (Nov 20, 2019)

They'll try to sell it as a bad apple ignoring the centuries of sex scandals their family is founded upon. And that Jimmy Savile was their best mate.


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Nov 20, 2019)

andysays said:


> Wonder what she'll say about it in her speech this Xmas



Some old shit about difficulties in families.  I'm just a poor mum, dealing with my childrens' problems.


----------



## binka (Nov 20, 2019)

He's the queen's favourite and all so imagine how bad the rest of them must be


----------



## Plumdaff (Nov 20, 2019)

So where's the long retirement going to be? Carribbean? France? Balmoral?

No real-life consequences of course. Absolutely corrupt and sickening.


----------



## strung out (Nov 20, 2019)

Plumdaff said:


> So where's the long retirement going to be? Carribbean? France? Balmoral?
> 
> No real-life consequences of course. Absolutely corrupt and sickening.


Maybe he'll do a Glitter and go to Cambodia or Vietnam.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 20, 2019)

strung out said:


> Maybe he'll do a Glitter and go to Cambodia or Vietnam.


Next stop will be draining Falkland sound


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 20, 2019)

Plumdaff said:


> So where's the long retirement going to be? Carribbean? France? Balmoral?


Woking.


----------



## friedaweed (Nov 20, 2019)

He'll march them up to the top of the hill and....


----------



## planetgeli (Nov 20, 2019)

friedaweed said:


> He'll march them up to the top of the hill and....



...be found dead hanging in a cell?


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 20, 2019)




----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 20, 2019)

friedaweed said:


> He'll march them up to the top of the hill and....


No one will believe he had ten thousand men


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 20, 2019)

So, about those 10,000 men you’ve had...


----------



## MickiQ (Nov 20, 2019)

When Piers Morgan (Ass Licker by Royal Appointment) is putting the boot in, you KNOW no-one believes a word he spouts.


----------



## discokermit (Nov 20, 2019)

Wasn't Morgan in Epstein's phonebook?


----------



## andysays (Nov 20, 2019)

Prince Andrew Pizza Express Woking reviews suspended


> TripAdvisor has suspended reviews for the Pizza Express restaurant Prince Andrew referenced during his interview about his links to Jeffrey Epstein.





> A TripAdvisor spokeswoman said the recent media attention caused a spike in spoof reviews. Reviews of the restaurant following the interview appear to have been deleted and the most recent is dated one week ago.





> A spokeswoman for the website said: "The recent media attention caused a spike of spoof review submissions that did not meet our guidelines... and we have taken the decision to temporarily suspend hosting new reviews on the restaurant's TripAdvisor listing page."


----------



## MrSki (Nov 20, 2019)




----------



## Marty1 (Nov 20, 2019)

Shirl said:


> I wonder who wrote that for him. The last paragraph is very much at odds with what he was saying in _that_ interview.



His mum after she sent Andy to the naughty stair.


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Nov 20, 2019)

"He was only resting in yer man's house"


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Nov 20, 2019)

He's absolutely fucked isn't he.


----------



## Shirl (Nov 20, 2019)

Mrs Miggins said:


> He's absolutely fucked isn't he.


Yes


----------



## Buckaroo (Nov 20, 2019)

Ecuadorian embassy has a spare room for him.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 20, 2019)

MrSki said:


>



Noncesence!


----------



## Detroit City (Nov 20, 2019)

looks like the paedo is going to have a talk with the FBI and will have to turn over his records


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Nov 20, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I love Kathy Burke.


By rights, she should be our head of state.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 20, 2019)

Detroit City said:


> looks like the paedo is going to have a talk with the FBI and will have to turn over his records


Dunno. Hope so, needless to say, but I'm not sure how any of this makes those things come about. What we are inching towards is a situation where the state will be somewhat less keen to keep him away from investigations, domestic or foreign. My entirely legal knowledge free thought is that he's in more danger if the Met restart an investigation into him. Ultimately, I can't see that happening either - the cops will be desperate not to have to do it. we'll probably hear they are not reopening things after he's faded from the headlines. Maybe a buried headline around polling day.  The fucker's ruined and he'll have to start resorting to even more grubby attempts at chiselling, but I don't see him in a court room.

Does his victim have the right to pursue him for damages over here?


----------



## Ming (Nov 21, 2019)

I wonder if he was ‘protected’ in the Falklands?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 21, 2019)

Ming said:


> I wonder if he was ‘protected’ in the Falklands?


Of course he was. Makes his absurd lie that more contemptible. Thick cunt probably didn't realise he was being protected, mind, given how fucking thick he is.


----------



## Detroit City (Nov 21, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Does his victim have the right to pursue him for damages over here?


I don't know but I doubt it


----------



## Ming (Nov 21, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Of course he was. Makes his absurd lie that more contemptible. Thick cunt probably didn't realise he was being protected, mind, given how fucking thick he is.


Well i did hear some things about why HMS Sheffield didn’t go to action stations, didn’t deploy chaff and didn’t turn the ships profile to minimize it towards the Exocet. From an ex-RN guy i used to work with.


----------



## elbows (Nov 21, 2019)




----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 21, 2019)

Ming said:


> Well i did hear some things about why HMS Sheffield didn’t go to action stations, didn’t deploy chaff and didn’t turn the ships profile to minimize it towards the Exocet. From an ex-RN guy i used to work with.


Ex-RN guy I know has been really struggling in the last couple of years as horrible memories of that war have been coming back to haunt him, as often happens when you get older. He most certainly hadn't been 'protected'. 

It's hard to say exactly which bit of that disgusting interview is the most contemptible, but his war hero lie is right up there.


----------



## Ming (Nov 21, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Ex-RN guy I know has been really struggling in the last couple of years as horrible memories of that war have been coming back to haunt him, as often happens when you get older. He most certainly hadn't been 'protected'.
> 
> It's hard to say exactly which bit of that disgusting interview is the most contemptible, but his war hero lie is right up there.


Well it might be ‘boat talk’. But from what I’ve heard the Sheffield was sacrificed to protect our royal friend.


----------



## Cid (Nov 21, 2019)

Ming said:


> Well it might be ‘boat talk’. But from what I’ve heard the Sheffield was sacrificed to protect our royal friend.



From a bloke in the pub?


----------



## Ming (Nov 21, 2019)

Cid said:


> From a bloke in the pub?


Pretty much.


----------



## Don Troooomp (Nov 21, 2019)

Detroit City said:


> looks like the paedo is going to have a talk with the FBI and will have to turn over his records



He might be forced to, but can they actually arrest him? Even if they do, can they get him into a court?
Frankly, as he very probably did it and definitely hung around with an especially nasty bastard of a man, arrest and court should be a possibility. As for his travel records and so on, they absolutely should be turned over as soon as possible.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 21, 2019)

He won’t see the inside of a courtroom. Imagine if he did, his mum’s coat of arms will be on the wall behind the judge’s fucking head!


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 21, 2019)

I am sick of hearing about the cunt now, wish we could just bundle him on a plane to the US, and let them sort it out.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 21, 2019)

farmerbarleymow said:


> By rights, she should be our head of state.


I don’t believe in states or heads of state, but, yes, if we need a figurehead to embody the decent values of our islands, it should be her.


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 21, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> I am sick of hearing about the cunt now, wish we could just bundle him on a plane to the US, and let them sort it out.



He’d need somewhere convenient to stay in the US tho.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 21, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> He’d need somewhere convenient to stay in the US tho.


Guantanamo


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 21, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Guantanamo



Not technical in the US, but it will do.


----------



## bluescreen (Nov 21, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> He’d need somewhere convenient to stay in the US tho.


Oh I'm sure one of his friends can put him up.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Nov 21, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> He’d need somewhere convenient to stay in the US tho.


I hear Mar a lago is nice at this time of life , doh bluescreen beat me too it


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 21, 2019)

ruffneck23 said:


> I hear Mar a lago is nice at this time of life , doh bluescreen beat me too it



Do they do good pizza there?


----------



## ruffneck23 (Nov 21, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Do they do good pizza there?


no your'e thinking of Mar a Woking , easy mistake to make though


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 21, 2019)

ruffneck23 said:


> I hear Mar a lago is nice at this time of life , doh bluescreen beat me too it



Florida gets pretty sweaty in the summer, will Randy Andy cope?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 21, 2019)

Prince Andrew to step back from whatever the f*ck it is he does

*The Duke of York is to step back from doing whatever it is he does with immediate effect, it has been confirmed.*

The news comes after the Duke was heavily criticised following a BBC Newsnight interview in which he was questioned about his relationship with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

In a statement, Prince Andrew said that he had asked the Queen for permission to step back from his duties and as she had no idea what it is he does anyway she had agreed to his request.

“It has obviously been a difficult decision,” said palace spokesman Simon Williams.

“But the duke has decided that for the time being he will stand down from his duties of playing golf, brokering backroom business deals with dodgy Saudi businessmen and hanging around at parties with convicted traffickers of child-prostitutes.

“The Duke intends to embark on a period of soul-searching and reflection – specifically reflecting on whether appearing on national television dribbling bollocks about being at the Pizza Express in Woking was really a good move.”

It is understood that the Queen met Prince Andrew and, with regret, accepted his decision.

“The Duke spoke with briefly with his mother earlier today to request permission to step back his duties,” confirmed Williams.

“Her Majesty said ‘of course, no sweat’ and did one of those mic-drop gestures. I don’t know where she gets this stuff from, I really don’t.”

Meanwhile, members of the public have been left surprised at Andrew being allowed to slink off into the shadows where no-one can see him.

Voter Tracy Fowler told us, “I think we can all agree he’s at his most dangerous when we can’t see him.

“Let’s be honest, I think we’d all be better off, and our young women would be a lot safer, if he was given a high-profile job where he’s visible 18 hours a day, seven days a week.”


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Nov 21, 2019)

I quite liked the Sun headline:  Grand Dole Duke


----------



## MickiQ (Nov 21, 2019)

Perhaps Pizza Express can find him a job he is clearly a connoisseur of their products


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 21, 2019)

He should resign his HRH title, donate his £249,000 per year allowance to a vulnerable children charity and get himself a real job.

I can get him started delivering parcels for Amazon within a week.  He’ll be sweating in no time.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 21, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> He should resign his HRH title, donate his £249,000 per year allowance to a vulnerable children charity and get himself a real job.
> 
> I can get him started delivering parcels for Amazon within a week.  He’ll be sweating in no time.



They stripped Lady Di of her HRH tagline - so same should happen to him. I guess then he could be known as the People's Nonce.


----------



## Tankus (Nov 21, 2019)

Anu


andysays said:


> Wonder what she'll say about it in her speech this Xmas


"_anus horribileus_"


----------



## krtek a houby (Nov 21, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> He should resign his HRH title, donate his £249,000 per year allowance to a vulnerable children charity and get himself a real job.
> 
> I can get him started delivering parcels for Amazon within a week.  He’ll be sweating in no time.



Amazon, you say?


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 21, 2019)

krtek a houby said:


> Amazon, you say?



Have I not mention it before?

Actually come to think of it Andy may not pass the CRB check.


----------



## Poi E (Nov 21, 2019)

I don't want him delivering his goods around here. Croydon is a respectable borough.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 21, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Have I not mention it before?
> 
> Actually come to think of it Andy may not pass the CRB check.


might pass corgi certification tho


----------



## mystic pyjamas (Nov 21, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> He should resign his HRH title,
> 
> Will his HRH title be dropped anyway after losing his royal duties and £249,000 annual allowance?


----------



## MickiQ (Nov 21, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> He should resign his HRH title, donate his £249,000 per year allowance to a vulnerable children charity and get himself a real job.
> 
> I can get him started delivering parcels for Amazon within a week.  He’ll be sweating in no time.


If he isn't glad handing then that £249K pa is effectively a very generous benefit payment, is he getting hassled by the Jobcentre about finding work?
I don't know about Amazon delivery driver, I have a 17 yr old daughter so wouldn't want him coming to my house, maybe get him a job in the warehouse with the robots.


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Nov 21, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> They stripped Lady Di of her HRH tagline - so same should happen to him. I guess then he could be known as the People's Nonce.



Brilliant!


----------



## brogdale (Nov 21, 2019)

Think I'd prefer it if he retained the HRH title, tbh.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 21, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Think I'd prefer it if he retained the HRH title, tbh.


his roaming hands


----------



## andysays (Nov 21, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> Perhaps Pizza Express can find him a job he is clearly a connoisseur of their products


I don't know if it's already been mentioned,  but I bet he has pineapple on his pizza.

Definitely a wrong un...


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 21, 2019)

andysays said:


> I don't know if it's already been mentioned,  but I bet he has pineapple on his pizza.
> 
> Definitely a wrong un...


you're missing out on one of the best flavour combinations, pizza with chillis and pineapple on


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 21, 2019)

59-year-old grounded by his mum


----------



## Detroit City (Nov 21, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> He’d need somewhere convenient to stay in the US tho.


he can stay at a legal brothel in Vegas


----------



## elbows (Nov 21, 2019)

Leave it to the entrepreneurs to put their foot in it.

Entrepreneurs back Prince Andrew's business scheme



> Will King, founder of King of Shaves, said it was "really sad" the Pitch@Palace initiative had "been affected by the personal issues around the Duke of York."
> 
> The scheme provides start-up firms with advice and contacts, but no funding.
> 
> A source close to Prince Andrew said he would continue to be involved.





> "If you're going to continue the Pitch@Palace in the royal environment, where you have an infrastructure that is paid for - I think, in part - by the taxpayer it would be an extraordinary shame that the palace don't see the opportunity in continuing this initiative."
> 
> He said the scheme had created £1bn of economic activity and noted that 97% of the companies who used it were still going.
> 
> But asked if it can continue with Prince Andrew at the helm, he said: "I don't know, I don't know."





> Nick Mason, co-founder of digital identity tool Zaka, said Pitch@Palace was "a fantastic programme for young entrepreneurs that offers valuable opportunities to learn from and connect with leaders of industry."
> 
> "The Duke of York and his team were a constant source of encouragement throughout the impeccably-run programme and are clearly passionate about empowering the wonderful ventures that participate," Mr Mason said.





> Alex Redston, co-founder of of Prison Voicemail, was one of the first people involved in the event.
> 
> He said the event had put him in contact with "one gentleman worth billions... who had incredible connections in telecoms and was interested in social impact".
> 
> "An amazing contact to make," Mr Redston said. "And other people who have helped us. Because we were so early stage we didn't quite understand the absolute rocket fuel that was there at the time."





> "The Duke of York has provided an excellent platform for businesses, like Damson, to benefit from the network of connections and associates [to which] his status gives him access," Mr Talbot said.
> 
> Rajeeb Dey, the chief executive of training software firm Learnerbly, said: "Pitch@Palace has provided hundreds of entrepreneurs with unparalleled access to leading investors and influencers in the world of business."



Young people, status, incredible connections, unparalleled access, influencers. Connect with leaders. What would you do to get ahead? We suck young blood, and it would be a crushing bore if those who fuck young blood were prevented from participating in this holy quest.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 21, 2019)

elbows said:


> Leave it to the entrepreneurs to put their foot in it.
> 
> Entrepreneurs back Prince Andrew's business scheme
> 
> ...


Great to hear what the founder of, errr, Prison Voicemail thinks

Edit ah actually just googled it and sounds alright, I assumed it was some sort of prison workfare call centre or something


----------



## elbows (Nov 21, 2019)

Save the genital networking club!


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 21, 2019)

Detroit City said:


> he can stay at a legal brothel in Vegas



There aren't any.


----------



## gosub (Nov 21, 2019)

andysays said:


> I don't know if it's already been mentioned,  but I bet he has pineapple on his pizza.
> 
> Definitely a wrong un...



That alone would justify him , drunk ,falling off the back if a yacht.  When it happens


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 21, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> There aren't any.


yeh prostitution illegal in clark county


----------



## gosub (Nov 21, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh prostitution illegal in clark county


Shhh you'll spoil the racket


----------



## A380 (Nov 21, 2019)




----------



## Detroit City (Nov 21, 2019)

A380 said:


> View attachment 190542


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 21, 2019)

good timing for D Walliams new book


----------



## elbows (Nov 21, 2019)

Special discount on that book for all President's Club members.


----------



## andysays (Nov 21, 2019)

Prince Andrew seen for first time since stepping back from royal duties


> The Duke of York has been seen for the first time since he announced he would step back from royal duties over the Jeffrey Epstein scandal. The prince was seen by photographers on Thursday driving out of his home in Windsor, Berkshire.



In the circumstances, surely PizzaExpress could be persuaded to deliver?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Nov 21, 2019)

elbows said:


> Leave it to the entrepreneurs to put their foot in it.
> 
> Entrepreneurs back Prince Andrew's business scheme
> 
> Young people, status, incredible connections, unparalleled access, influencers. Connect with leaders. What would you do to get ahead? We suck young blood, and it would be a crushing bore if those who fuck young blood were prevented from participating in this holy quest.


Note that King of Shaves is a grooming firm.

(ok I stole that from Popbitch)


----------



## danski (Nov 21, 2019)

andysays said:


> Prince Andrew seen for first time since stepping back from royal duties
> 
> 
> In the circumstances, surely PizzaExpress could be persuaded to deliver?



Erm, I reckon the local pizza places could do with the trade so perhaps an internet campaign to send “Pizza for the pronce” ? 

Eta. obviously rather puerile. But beer.


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Nov 21, 2019)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Note that King of Shaves is a grooming firm.
> 
> (ok I stole that from Popbitch)


My god! Is Popbitch still going?? Must subscribe again...


----------



## SpineyNorman (Nov 21, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> He should resign his HRH title, donate his £249,000 per year allowance to a vulnerable children charity and get himself a real job.
> 
> I can get him started delivering parcels for Amazon within a week.  He’ll be sweating in no time.


Fuck that, we'll put him to work with some hemp in the devil's arse in the peak district so he can make the rope with which we'll hang him


----------



## teqniq (Nov 21, 2019)




----------



## bluescreen (Nov 21, 2019)

Has anyone mentioned the bad grammar in PA's grovelling statement yet?


----------



## Wilf (Nov 21, 2019)

teqniq said:


> View attachment 190560


Reminds you what a fantastic appointment toby young was as HE watchdog tsar or whatever it was.  

Upthread I wondered who would be first to defend young Windsorius Noncicus. Thought katy hopkins would have lead the field, but then here comes toby dipping a tentative toe in the water.  And Rod Liddle... I've actually just found a piece where he's _critical _of the Woking Wastrel!


----------



## Wilf (Nov 21, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> Has anyone mentioned the bad grammar in PA's grovelling statement yet?
> View attachment 190562


Grammarly, the website that helps anyone, high or low, who suddenly finds he has to write his own press release.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 21, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Grammarly, the website that helps anyone, high or low, who suddenly finds he has to write his own press release.


Is it?


----------



## bluescreen (Nov 21, 2019)

No one minds a split infinitive these days. It's the plural subject + singular verb that struck me. (Isn't it called 'attraction' where an intervening noun steals the verb?)


----------



## UrbaneFox (Nov 21, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> I am sick of hearing about the cunt now, wish we could just bundle him on a plane to the US, and let them sort it out.



+ a lifelong trip for his ex-wife


----------



## discokermit (Nov 22, 2019)

Bundle them out of a plane over the US.


----------



## discokermit (Nov 22, 2019)

A very short lifelong trip.


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 22, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> I don't know about Amazon delivery driver, I have a 17 yr old daughter so wouldn't want him coming to my house, maybe get him a job in the warehouse with the robots.



Or simply send him to the Amazon?

One way ticket.


----------



## JuanTwoThree (Nov 22, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> (Isn't it called 'attraction' where an intervening noun steals the verb?)



Or 'proximity agreement' IIRC


----------



## Don Troooomp (Nov 22, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Is it?



I believe it's a little more important to keep pressure up and hope it pushes him to testify. Grammar would appear to be a minor nothing when you consider he very probably raped teenaged kids, and definitely hung around with at least one man that we know 100% did.


----------



## Don Troooomp (Nov 22, 2019)

A380 said:


> View attachment 190542



I have to disagree. He'll be in Paris being driven by a drunk.


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 22, 2019)

The Queen’s speech this year may start with the queen saying, my lad eh? worra cunt!


----------



## krtek a houby (Nov 22, 2019)

Apologies if already posted


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 22, 2019)

krtek a houby said:


> Apologies if already posted


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 22, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> The Queen’s speech this year may start with the queen saying, my lad eh? worra cunt!


Channelling the late cilla black


----------



## souljacker (Nov 22, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Channelling the late cilla black



All the way from Washington, DC, surprise surprise Andrew, it's the FBI!


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 22, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Channelling the late cilla black



I envisioned Liz stood at a mic stand, mic in one hand, glass of scotch and burning cigarette in the other, more like Colin Crompton.


----------



## Tankus (Nov 22, 2019)

The glitter band need a new front man


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 22, 2019)

Huddersfield says, "No" to the People's Nonce. Prince Andrew quits as university chancellor


----------



## Cid (Nov 22, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Huddersfield says, "No" to the People's Nonce. Prince Andrew quits as university chancellor



He's already stepped down from public duties, and that's some rather fawning 'thanks' from the university, so don't think they really deserve any credit for that. Well, the university admin anyway, imagine many of the staff and students weren't happy.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 22, 2019)

Cid said:


> He's already stepped down from public duties, and that's some rather fawning 'thanks' from the university, so don't think they really deserve any credit for that. Well, the university admin anyway, imagine many of the staff and students weren't happy.


doesn't seem that fawning to me, just some blah


----------



## Cid (Nov 22, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> doesn't seem that fawning to me, just some blah



I mean maybe I'm reading too much into it, but I don't really see any need for thanks, or repeating his line on the Epstein relationship... And given KPMG and the like were cutting ties days ago.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 22, 2019)

Cid said:


> I mean maybe I'm reading too much into it, but I don't really see any need for thanks, or repeating his line on the Epstein relationship... And given KPMG and the like were cutting ties days ago.


it's just normal organisational hot air, the thanks, and the repeating his line is just them saying 'this is what he told us'. it's as bland as can be and doubtless hoping the royal nonce will never darken their doors again.


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Nov 22, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Huddersfield says, "No" to the People's Nonce. Prince Andrew quits as university chancellor


"The university said the duke had informed it that "he continues to unequivocally condemn Jeffrey Epstein's activities and regrets his ill-judged association with him".

Funny how he absolutely, categorically _did not _say that in the interview. It's disgusting. He clearly does not actually feel that or he would have said that. He didn't even have the wit to understand that that is what he _should _say. He is only saying it now because they have realised that this is what he _must _say.

The Royals tread a very fine line with public opinion and proving yourself to be an out and out vain entitled cunt who cares nothing for anyone else shows them up for what many suspect they are but tolerate them because they don't go out and prove it every day. He's just proved it. And we've all seen him for what he really is.


----------



## Cid (Nov 22, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> it's just normal organisational hot air, the thanks, and the repeating his line is just them saying 'this is what he told us'. it's as bland as can be and doubtless hoping the royal nonce will never darken their doors again.



Yeah, I realise it's normal organisation hot air, my point is that giving him that much is too much. The 'Due to the circumstances and in discussion with the university, he has decided to step down immediately to allow the university to appoint a successor.' would have been entirely sufficient. And they probably should have issued a statement immediately following the interview (or at least when his corporate ties started backing out) that they would be 'reconsidering the position of the Duke of York in our organisation' or some such bollocks.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 22, 2019)

Mrs Miggins said:


> "The university said the duke had informed it that "he continues to unequivocally condemn Jeffrey Epstein's activities and regrets his ill-judged association with him".
> 
> Funny how he absolutely, categorically _did not _say that in the interview. It's disgusting. He clearly does not actually feel that or he would have said that. He didn't even have the wit to understand that that is what he _should _say. He is only saying it now because they have realised that this is what he _must _say.
> 
> The Royals tread a very fine line with public opinion and proving yourself to be an out and out vain entitled cunt who cares nothing for anyone else shows them up for what many suspect they are but tolerate them because they don't go out and prove it every day. He's just proved it. And we've all seen him for what he really is.




Bang on


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 22, 2019)

Mrs Miggins said:


> "The university said the duke had informed it that "he continues to unequivocally condemn Jeffrey Epstein's activities and regrets his ill-judged association with him".
> 
> Funny how he absolutely, categorically _did not _say that in the interview. It's disgusting. He clearly does not actually feel that or he would have said that. He didn't even have the wit to understand that that is what he _should _say. He is only saying it now because they have realised that this is what he _must _say.
> 
> The Royals tread a very fine line with public opinion and proving yourself to be an out and out vain entitled cunt who cares nothing for anyone else shows them up for what many suspect they are but tolerate them because they don't go out and prove it every day. He's just proved it. And we've all seen him for what he really is.


yeh he's kippered himself


----------



## Chilli.s (Nov 22, 2019)

Mrs Miggins said:


> "The university said the duke had informed it that "he continues to unequivocally condemn Jeffrey Epstein's activities and regrets his ill-judged association with him".
> 
> Funny how he absolutely, categorically _did not _say that in the interview. It's disgusting. He clearly does not actually feel that or he would have said that. He didn't even have the wit to understand that that is what he _should _say. He is only saying it now because they have realised that this is what he _must _say.
> 
> The Royals tread a very fine line with public opinion and proving yourself to be an out and out vain entitled cunt who cares nothing for anyone else shows them up for what many suspect they are but tolerate them because they don't go out and prove it every day. He's just proved it. And we've all seen him for what he really is.


Well said.


----------



## MrSki (Nov 22, 2019)




----------



## Don Troooomp (Nov 23, 2019)

He's being abandoned by pretty much everyone but still trying to hang on to bits, probably in the hope of a future comeback. Sadly, there's no proof he actually committed the crimes he very likely did, so all we have is the stupidity of hanging around with a convicted pedophile. Since he will probably remain protected from any enquiries and refuse to answer questions on anything to anyone in authority, he'll probably get away with it ... unless some bombshell evidence turns up. 

Prince Andrew's private office to be moved out of Buckingham Palace


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Nov 23, 2019)

Don Troooomp said:


> He's being abandoned by pretty much everyone but still trying to hang on to bits, probably in the hope of a future comeback. Sadly, there's no proof he actually committed the crimes he very likely did, so all we have is the stupidity of hanging around with a convicted pedophile. Since he will probably remain protected from any enquiries and refuse to answer questions on anything to anyone in authority, he'll probably get away with it ... unless some bombshell evidence turns up.
> 
> Prince Andrew's private office to be moved out of Buckingham Palace


All we have is the proof in that interview of the absolute contempt this man has for the public and the authorities. He is a liar and a fantasist. Does he really think that we will believe that he had a medical condition that stopped him from sweating and therefore it couldn't possibly have been him being described in the nightclub? I mean it's beyond ludicrous. He has shown himself to be someone whose character is in the fucking toilet. I think that has more to do with all the charities etc. dropping him.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 23, 2019)

About the first 10 minutes of yesterday's 'Have I Got News For You' was on this cunt, worth watching for the laughs.


----------



## Don Troooomp (Nov 23, 2019)

Mrs Miggins said:


> He is a liar and a fantasist



I'm pretty sure that's true, but will there be enough pressure for it to come out? I hope so but it's not likely. More likely is they'll ride out the storm and he'll disappear to anywhere the press can't find him easily.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 23, 2019)

Don Troooomp said:


> I'm pretty sure that's true, but will there be enough pressure for it to come out? I hope so but it's not likely. More likely is they'll ride out the storm and he'll disappear to anywhere the press can't find him easily.


How many of your predictions have thus far proven accurate?


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Nov 23, 2019)

Don Troooomp said:


> I'm pretty sure that's true, but will there be enough pressure for it to come out? I hope so but it's not likely. More likely is they'll ride out the storm and he'll disappear to anywhere the press can't find him easily.


I very much doubt he will be arrested or prosecuted for anything. He will just disappear as you say. Hopefully there will be one less royal wedding to endure at least.

I am sure he will still have a very comfortable life given his personal fortune and he will no doubt still be surrounded by people who believe him to be beyond reproach.


----------



## bluescreen (Nov 23, 2019)

He is bolstered by the same attitude that enabled police and social workers to say that 13 year old girls  groomed by sex exploitation gangs 'have made a lifestyle choice', hence were not actually victims of anything.


----------



## D'wards (Nov 23, 2019)

Mrs Miggins said:


> I very much doubt he will be arrested or prosecuted for anything. He will just disappear as you say. Hopefully there will be one less royal wedding to endure at least.
> 
> I am sure he will still have a very comfortable life given his personal fortune and he will no doubt still be surrounded by people who believe him to be beyond reproach.


He'll have to raise his head for his second Chelsea Sloaney daughter's wedding which I think is imminent. 
He'll have to lay well low in the photos, for Horse and Hound or Hello or whoever wants them


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Nov 23, 2019)

D'wards said:


> He'll have to raise his head for his second Chelsea Sloaney daughter's wedding which I think is imminent.
> He'll have to lay well low in the photos, for Horse and Hound or Hello or whoever wants them


It's going to be interesting to see how this goes. I can't see how they can be any TV coverage of it but I'm not a royalist so I don't know how this is playing with those people. I could ask my mother-in-law but that would mean speaking to her.


----------



## MickiQ (Nov 23, 2019)

The other daughter's wedding was fairly low key especially compared to the Harry and Meghan show, I would have expected this one would have been as well but will probably draw a lot more attention now purely because of the accusations against her Dad. 
She is probably not looking forward to it as much though as she once did


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Nov 23, 2019)

Mrs Miggins said:


> It's going to be interesting to see how this goes. I can't see how they can be any TV coverage of it but I'm not a royalist so I don't know how this is playing with those people. I could ask my mother-in-law but that would mean speaking to her.



They're not high enough up the royal pecking order for tv coverage anyway are they? Only the properly weird royal obsessives are going to give a toss.


----------



## Thora (Nov 23, 2019)

I think the other princess' wedding was televised.


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Nov 23, 2019)

It was low key but it was still on the telly. Not the ceremony but there was coverage.


----------



## MickiQ (Nov 23, 2019)

It got a mention but it wasn’t the monster bore fest that Prince Ginger's was


----------



## Wilf (Nov 23, 2019)

Mrs Miggins said:


> All we have is the proof in that interview of the absolute contempt this man has for the public and the authorities. He is a liar and a fantasist. Does he really think that we will believe that he had a medical condition that stopped him from sweating and therefore it couldn't possibly have been him being described in the nightclub? I mean it's beyond ludicrous. He has shown himself to be someone whose character is in the fucking toilet. I think that has more to do with all the charities etc. dropping him.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 23, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> About the first 10 minutes of yesterday's 'Have I Got News For You' was on this cunt, worth watching for the laughs.


Must admit I was expecting/hoping it would be more vicious.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 23, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> He is bolstered by the same attitude that enabled police and social workers to say that 13 year old girls  groomed by sex exploitation gangs 'have made a lifestyle choice', hence were not actually victims of anything.


... and on that theme I do hope tommy robinson makes as much of this case as he has of 'Muslim grooming gangs' etc.


----------



## cantsin (Nov 23, 2019)

Wilf said:


> ... and on that theme I do hope tommy robinson makes as much of this case as he has of 'Muslim grooming gangs' etc.



like private school teachers, 70's radio dj's / tv bods, priests, football coaches etc etc , Royal noncing is ok with Tommy and the crew


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Nov 23, 2019)

cantsin said:


> like private school teachers, 70's radio dj's / tv bods, priests, football coaches etc etc , Royal noncing is ok with Tommy and the crew



Football coaches, nazis, his mates...


----------



## cyril_smear (Nov 23, 2019)

I know I'm a bit late but how could I find this interview he did on sky catch up? I'm not having much luck


----------



## bluescreen (Nov 23, 2019)

cyril_smear said:


> I know I'm a bit late but how could I find this interview he did on sky catch up? I'm not having much luck


It was on BBC. On iplayer:
BBC iPlayer - Newsnight - Prince Andrew & the Epstein Scandal: The Newsnight Interview

E2A or was that some joke that whizzed over my head?


----------



## MrSki (Nov 23, 2019)

cyril_smear said:


> I know I'm a bit late but how could I find this interview he did on sky catch up? I'm not having much luck


It is on BBC i player. Full transcript here Transcript in full: Prince Andrew's interview

The interview with Virginia Roberts is being aired on 2nd December but was recorded before the Andrew one.


----------



## cyril_smear (Nov 23, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> It was on BBC. On iplayer:
> BBC iPlayer - Newsnight - Prince Andrew & the Epstein Scandal: The Newsnight Interview
> 
> E2A or was that some joke that whizzed over my head?



No it wasn't a joke. I can't use the tablet for videos so I need to find it on sky if possible


----------



## bluescreen (Nov 23, 2019)

cyril_smear said:


> No it wasn't a joke. I can't use the tablet for videos so I need to find it on sky if possible


OK, sorry - didn't realise that. Can't help with Sky but there's an analysed transcript here if you like: Statement Analysis ®: Statement Analysis: Prince Andrew Interview


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 23, 2019)

cyril_smear said:


> No it wasn't a joke. I can't use the tablet for videos so I need to find it on sky if possible



Does your Sky box not include the iPlayer app?

My Freesat one does.


----------



## extra dry (Nov 23, 2019)

He will be put up in some 3rd tear house on one of more isolated estates, proberly scotland or some where exotic.


----------



## Celyn (Nov 23, 2019)

Oh hell no.   .  Quick, somebody tell him there's no golf in Scotland. That might keep him away.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 23, 2019)

Just dug ouy my parasitic royals card set from a few years back

Maybe his public revulsion score needs to revised


----------



## teqniq (Nov 23, 2019)

It probably trumps this one, but still.


----------



## tim (Nov 23, 2019)

cantsin said:


> like private school teachers, 70's radio dj's / tv bods, priests, football coaches etc etc , Royal noncing is ok with Tommy and the crew



There was plenty of state school teacher noncing too!


----------



## T & P (Nov 24, 2019)

This has been said ITT already, but as well as being a thoroughly unpleasant human being he also seems to be thick as pigshit and/or too arrogant for his own good.

There have been plenty of instances of rich and powerful wrong’uns going before a panel/ trial or answering the press, and whereas in many cases it was an unwinnable task, at least they had the common sense to hire a team of advisors to coach and prepare them for the grilling laying ahead of them and limit the damage as much as possible.

This pretentious twat however not only ignored the advice of every of his advisers warning against the folly of doing the interview in the first place, but clearly dived in without any preparation whatsoever and thought he was clever enough to just wing it and produce a convincing performance just by his wits.

I wonder how his kids feel. It’d be interesting to hear their answer if asked if they can corroborate the Pizza Express story..


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 24, 2019)

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/queen-cancels-prince-andrews-60th-birthday-bash-3dx6rwkr3



> The Queen has cancelled a party she had planned to host for Prince Andrew and his charities to mark his 60th birthday in February and is understood to be intending to hold only a small family dinner.
> 
> The move comes as the Duke of York is preparing to give up all his charity commitments in a sign that he is unlikely ever to resume royal duties. In addition, American officials are examining procedures for a formal FBI interview with Andrew in Britain. A source close to the duke said he would be “happy to co-operate”.
> 
> ...


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 24, 2019)

It’s good that it’s not really his alleged noncery that is the thing bringing him down here, but him outing himself as an arrogant liar who treats us plebs with utter contempt. Hopefully most of our fellow subjects will realise that this Randy Andy isn’t an outlier royal, this is the attitude of all of them, it has to be for them to assume their roles. And that realisation will hasten the day the guillotines are erected in Trafalgar Square.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 24, 2019)

What's with princes and their friendships with sexual abusers?

Barry Duke in the Freethinker ruminates on the similarities between Andrew's connection with Epstein, and Charles' ‘misguided’ friendship with Peter Ball, the former Bishop of Lewes, then Gloucester, who was jailed for 32 months for abusing young men, and whom Charles supported.


----------



## maomao (Nov 24, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> What's with princes and their friendships with sexual abusers?
> 
> Barry Duke in the Freethinker ruminates on the similarities between Andrew's connection with Epstein, and Charles' ‘misguided’ friendship with Peter Ball, the former Bishop of Lewes, then Gloucester, who was jailed for 32 months for abusing young men, and whom Charles supported.


And Savile who was their mate of course.


----------



## Poi E (Nov 24, 2019)

These are people taken from their mothers and put through highly abnormal schooling. The ruling class abuse their own so they may go into the world and abuse others.


----------



## Idris2002 (Nov 24, 2019)

Looks like Android had a secret meeting with the Ghis creature in June:

https://nypost.com/2019/11/24/prince-andrew-and-ghislaine-maxwell-had-secret-buckingham-rendezvous/

That fits with one comment I saw on his now infamous interview, that it wouldn't have happened unless he thought there was still more details (and damning details) to come out.


----------



## clicker (Nov 24, 2019)

It's satisfying that he really has got _no one_ fighting his corner.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 24, 2019)

T & P said:


> I wonder how his kids feel. It’d be interesting to hear their answer if asked if they can corroborate the Pizza Express story..


I wondered about that: 'oh, yah, I remember that night well. Mumsy was out and she and HRH had this rule where if One is out of One's house the other One will be in in One's house, yah? And okay, yah, HRH took One and my sister, the other One, on that imaginary trip to, gasp, ha ha, Woking, yah! And Pater took a call from some chap from the colonies arranging £15,000 for Mumsy. Hang on, was that the bit I'm supposed to mention or _not _mention? Gosh, it's so difficult being interviewed! Yah?'


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 24, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I wondered about that: 'oh, yah, I remember that night well. Mumsy was out and she and HRH had this rule where if One is out of One's house the other One will be in in One's house, yah? And okay, yah, HRH took One and my sister, the other One, on that imaginary trip to, gasp, ha ha, Woking, yah! And Pater took a call from some chap from the colonies arranging £15,000 for Mumsy. Hang on, was that the bit I'm supposed to mention or _not _mention? Gosh, it's so difficult being interviewed! Yah?'


'i mean, gosh, really, Woking, Pater? Windsor, or Maidenhead at a push. Couldn't possible have gone to Woking, not even if one were dead. That's the most humiliating aspect, of this whole saga, that the oiks think one actually goes to such places'


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 24, 2019)

"I'd rather be dead in a ditch than go to Woking"


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 24, 2019)

Lord Camomile said:


> "I'd rather be dead in a ditch than go to Woking"


Let's get Woking done


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 24, 2019)

Lord Camomile said:


> "I'd rather be dead in a ditch than go to Woking"


Reminds me of the auld elvis costello song 'I don't wanna go to Woking'


----------



## bluescreen (Nov 24, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Reminds me of the auld elvis costello song 'I don't wanna go to Woking'


_He thinks of all the lips that he licks
And all the girls that he's going to fix_


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 24, 2019)




----------



## Marty1 (Nov 24, 2019)

Blimey!


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 24, 2019)

LBC does tend to be a magnet for nutters.


----------



## elbows (Nov 24, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I wondered about that: 'oh, yah, I remember that night well. Mumsy was out and she and HRH had this rule where if One is out of One's house the other One will be in in One's house, yah? And okay, yah, HRH took One and my sister, the other One, on that imaginary trip to, gasp, ha ha, Woking, yah! And Pater took a call from some chap from the colonies arranging £15,000 for Mumsy. Hang on, was that the bit I'm supposed to mention or _not _mention? Gosh, it's so difficult being interviewed! Yah?'



The whole Woking thing was actually a sitcom style misunderstanding when somebody heard something about the 'Duke of Woke' and reached entirely the wrong conclusion. With hilarious consequences, and a special posho snort version of a laughter track.


----------



## MickiQ (Nov 24, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> LBC does tend to be a magnet for nutters.


From the posh accent I'm convinced that the first caller was actually Brenda herself.
Been to see my in-laws today (FiL's birthday last week) and when Chief Petty Officer (Rtd) Stroppy Scouser refers to a member of the Royal Family and far more importantly a former Naval Officer as 'A F*cking Nonce' then I'm pretty sure than Andy boy's credibility has hit rock bottom


----------



## Dogsauce (Nov 24, 2019)

Lord Camomile said:


> "I'd rather be dead in a ditch than go to Woking"



That’s the cleverness of the bluff, nobody would usually admit to going to Woking so you’d assume it must be true.


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 24, 2019)

Apparently the hill he marches up and down has now erected fencing to prevent him from doing so again.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 24, 2019)

Well, it would seem he has another hill to die on now.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 25, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Blimey!



When you see something like that posted you think, 'oh, I'm sure he didn't really get 3 proper 'mad' callers in a row, I'm sure it can't be as wild as all that'. But it was.  

A while back I was wondering who would step up to defend him. These three are right up there with that M'Lady Colin Campbell. 4 intrepid clowns who tread where even Katy Hopkins dare not.


----------



## elbows (Nov 25, 2019)

The profit motive.


----------



## Don Troooomp (Nov 25, 2019)

Since the queen has cancelled his birthday party, do you think we should all chip in to take him out for a pizza?


----------



## Poi E (Nov 25, 2019)

We already chip in for the fuckers.


----------



## clicker (Nov 25, 2019)

I think Andrew is the only Royal I've had the pleasure to witness totally and irrevocably  self implode. It's interesting times. It'll be a source of light relief in the exam room in 2119.
 But they've got to implode at a rate faster than once in my lifetime,  otherwise we'll never get shot of them.


----------



## Idris2002 (Nov 25, 2019)

Lord Camomile said:


> "I'd rather be dead in a ditch than go to Woking"


Ditches are of course the curse of the Woking classes.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 25, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> Apparently the hill he marches up and down has now erected fencing to prevent him from doing so again.


should have kept him inside the fencing


----------



## dessiato (Nov 25, 2019)

The Prince has really lost a lot of respect. I'd like to say I feel very sorry for him.

But I prefer not to lie.


----------



## Poi E (Nov 25, 2019)

Did people respect him before this? Either indifference, or, if they knew him, loathing.


----------



## clicker (Nov 25, 2019)

I reckon the majority of people (who knew him or didnt know him) always thought of him as an obnoxious fool. Which is why him spectacularly removing his own mask is so fitting.


----------



## Ming (Nov 25, 2019)

Interesting point from a caller on James O'Brian's show about why the Pizza Express story is easily provable/disprovable because of the historical logs his close protection team would have regarding his location.


----------



## clicker (Nov 25, 2019)

Ming said:


> Interesting point from a caller on James O'Brian's show about why the Pizza Express story is easily provable/disprovable because of the historical logs his close protection team would have regarding his location.



Pizza Express is an irrelevant red herring. He should have been asked where he was at midnight, when it's been alleged he was sweating profusely in Tramp.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 25, 2019)

clicker said:


> Pizza Express is an irrelevant red herring. He should have been asked where he was at midnight, when it's been alleged he was sweating profusely in Tramp.


In the photo, he isn't wearing a suit and tie, and he always wears a suit and tie when he goes to London. And he has never been to the bar at Tramp. And he has never been upstairs at Maxwell's gaffe. And he couldn't sweat at the time due to being a war hero.

Really, he covered all bases here. Not sure what more he can do.


----------



## Ming (Nov 25, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> In the photo, he isn't wearing a suit and tie, and he always wears a suit and tie when he goes to London. And he has never been to the bar at Tramp. And he has never been upstairs at Maxwell's gaffe. And he couldn't sweat at the time due to being a war hero.
> 
> Really, he covered all bases here. Not sure what more he can do.


Yeah. I guess i'm being unfair. He's just too honorable y'see.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 25, 2019)

Ming said:


> Yeah. I guess i'm being unfair. He's just too honorable y'see.


I find it all too believable that he's never been to the bar at Tramp. And really, given that that bit of the story is probably true, it follows that the rest of it must be true as well. Logic, innit?


----------



## UrbaneFox (Nov 25, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I wondered about that: 'oh, yah, I remember that night well. Mumsy was out and she and HRH had this rule where if One is out of One's house the other One will be in in One's house, yah? And okay, yah, HRH took One and my sister, the other One, on that imaginary trip to, gasp, ha ha, Woking, yah!



OK but that's actually where you're SOOOO completely like WRONG yah?

I was actually like really HAPPY to go to Woking, because for a moment it sounded as though someone said that the princesses should go out WORKING.

OBVS being taken out for pizza is a much better lifestyle choice than getting a real, like JOB, every day for your entire life, even it is only helping granny's servants to trim the Christmas tree.


----------



## extra dry (Nov 26, 2019)

More on the interview, looks like it was a bad idea, a very bad idea.


----------



## gosub (Nov 26, 2019)

Aparrently he has a chalet in Switzerland so I switching from falling off the break of a yacht drunk to skiing/Rock climbing accident


----------



## gosub (Nov 26, 2019)

Lord Camomile said:


> "I'd rather be dead in a ditch than go to Woking"



My now ex wife proposed to me in Woking, on the Railair coach.


----------



## Rosemary Jest (Nov 27, 2019)

gosub said:


> My now ex wife proposed to me in Woking, on the Railair coach.



Did you go to Pizza Express to celebrate?


----------



## Archimage (Nov 27, 2019)




----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 27, 2019)

Rosemary Jest said:


> Did you go to Pizza Express to celebrate?


They were on the express and got a British rail pizza to celebrate


----------



## T & P (Nov 27, 2019)

He's looking a lot like the Do Not Want guy these days...


----------



## clicker (Nov 27, 2019)

T & P said:


> He's looking a lot like the Do Not Want guy these days...


He's just realised if it was a Tuesday he should have got free dough balls.


----------



## gosub (Nov 27, 2019)

Rosemary Jest said:


> Did you go to Pizza Express to celebrate?



Nah Weathspoons,, for a classier nonce free experience


----------



## extra dry (Nov 27, 2019)

T & P said:


> He's looking a lot like the Do Not Want guy these days...


Keeping an eye out for any unofficail Press Cars or Pillion bike riders, he looks worried about an airbag fault.


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 27, 2019)

They seem to be doing an extended version next week.



Wonder why.


----------



## magneze (Nov 27, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Wonder why.


Probably the same day they have Andrew Neil interviewing Johnson.


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 27, 2019)

magneze said:


> Probably the same day they have Andrew Neil interviewing Johnson.


Oh they won't be doing that, obviously.


----------



## magneze (Nov 27, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Oh they won't be doing that, obviously.


I'm sure they'd be terrible sorry.


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 28, 2019)

Archimage said:


>




lol, superb


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 29, 2019)

Prince Andrew: Scotland Yard holds talks with FBI over sex claims — The Times and The Sunday Times


----------



## T & P (Nov 30, 2019)

Private Eye’s front cover this week made me laugh...


----------



## UrbaneFox (Dec 1, 2019)

According to The Times today, when Prince Philip retired Buckingham Palace wrote to the Grenadier Guards asking if they would like to have Prince Andrew as their patron.

The Guards wrote back asking if they had any other royal instead. The Palace was furious and insisted they invite Prince Andrew.

Made me smile, anyway.


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 1, 2019)

I don't know if the queen has died but social media is going nuts.

If it's just daftness fair enough...otherwise Andy's going to jail.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 1, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> I don't know if the queen has died but social media is going nuts.
> 
> If it's just daftness fair enough...otherwise Andy's going to jail.


Thread for that:
Has the Queen died?


----------



## Marty1 (Dec 1, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> .....otherwise Andy's going to jail.



For what crimes?  What would the charges be?

I’m not sure if a Royal would ever face jail time unfortunately.


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 1, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> For what crimes?  What would the charges be?
> 
> I’m not sure if a Royal would ever face jail time unfortunately.


Well...the crimes are in the thread title and when the queen pops it...that's it for the royals.

I've already said that charges against a royal won't happen....her maj popping her golden clogs would change that, I think, hopefully...fuck you all it's christmas I can wish for what I want.


----------



## jakethesnake (Dec 1, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Well...the crimes are in the thread title and when the queen pops it...that's it for the royals.
> 
> I've already said that charges against a royal won't happen....her maj popping her golden clogs would change that, I think, hopefully...fuck you all it's christmas I can wish for what I want.


It's the hope that kills you


----------



## Wilf (Dec 2, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> For what crimes?  What would the charges be?
> 
> I’m not sure if a Royal would ever face jail time unfortunately.


Charles I.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 2, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Charles I.


In prison for quite some time prior to execution


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Dec 2, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Well...the crimes are in the thread title and when the queen pops it...that's it for the royals.


I doubt it. The rehabilitation of Dear Chucky has been going on for years and the public lurve Wills and Kate and their cute little offspring.


----------



## Badgers (Dec 2, 2019)

Jeffrey Epstein, Blackmail and a Lucrative ‘Hot List’

Interesting


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 2, 2019)

Mrs Miggins said:


> I doubt it. The rehabilitation of Dear Chucky has been going on for years and the public lurve Wills and Kate and their cute little offspring.


at the moment. similar things were thought in france in 1787 and indeed 1789


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Dec 2, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> at the moment. similar things were thought in france in 1787 and indeed 1789



Yeah but realisitically....


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 2, 2019)

Mrs Miggins said:


> Yeah but realisitically....


the thought is parent to the deed of course


----------



## brogdale (Dec 2, 2019)

Mrs Miggins said:


> Yeah but realisitically....


----------



## cupid_stunt (Dec 2, 2019)

Jeremy Corbyn suggests royal family should be cut in size


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 2, 2019)

other methods are available


Spoiler


----------



## brogdale (Dec 2, 2019)

.


----------



## killer b (Dec 2, 2019)

brogdale said:


> .


that account is proper scum - best not to share his shit (it's usually available elsewhere)


----------



## brogdale (Dec 2, 2019)

killer b said:


> that account is proper scum - best not to share his shit (it's usually available elsewhere)


Will remove.


----------



## extra dry (Dec 2, 2019)

UrbaneFox said:


> According to The Times today, when Prince Philip retired Buckingham Palace wrote to the Grenadier Guards asking if they would like to have Prince Andrew as their patron.
> 
> The Guards wrote back asking if they had any other royal instead. The Palace was furious and insisted they invite Prince Andrew.
> 
> Made me smile, anyway.


One of thy really obscure royals persons like Lord Cuthbert the 7th of Pilchestiter under wolde.


----------



## Casual Observer (Dec 2, 2019)

_"He is the most hideous dancer I've ever seen in my life.... His sweat was like it was raining basically everywhere" _- the great Virginia Giuffre on Ponce Andrew, Panorama, 2019


----------



## brogdale (Dec 2, 2019)

Casual Observer said:


> _"He is the most hideous dancer I've ever seen in my life.... His sweat was like it was raining basically everywhere" _- the great Virginia Giuffre on Ponce Andrew, Panorama, 2019


Nonce, not Ponce?


----------



## Casual Observer (Dec 2, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Nonce, not Ponce?


Both but on reflection, I should have gone with nonce.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 2, 2019)

Casual Observer said:


> Both but on reflection, I should have gone with nonce.


I think so.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 2, 2019)

Nonce Andrew has a nicer ring to it. The People's Paed works too.


----------



## clicker (Dec 2, 2019)

Or the noncey, poncey, paedo prince to give him his full title.


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 2, 2019)

I’m still hoping that York disowns him.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Dec 2, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Nonce Andrew has a nicer ring to it. The People's Paed works too.


Go full saxon. Andrëw the beäst.


----------



## dessiato (Dec 2, 2019)

Prince Andrew Set For Pop Stardom - Costa Del Sol Update

Maybe a cover of "It wasn't me."


----------



## Buckaroo (Dec 2, 2019)

Don't think Randy Andy will be visiting US anytime soon. Derschowitz has got some chutzpah, kept his pants on for fucks sake.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 2, 2019)

What was the £15k loan to Fergie all about? He spends £12k on a flight to New York to scrounge £15k off a nonce. Bit whiffy.


----------



## Buckaroo (Dec 2, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> What was the £15k loan to Fergie all about? He spends £12k on a flight to New York to scrounge £15k off a nonce. Bit whiffy.



Yeah, never got that. They're all fucking loaded, chicken feed to them.


----------



## Marty1 (Dec 2, 2019)

The MET not investigating seems very strange.


----------



## Buckaroo (Dec 2, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> The MET not investigating seems very strange.



Why is that strange?


----------



## Marty1 (Dec 2, 2019)

Buckaroo said:


> Why is that strange?



Pardon?


----------



## Buckaroo (Dec 2, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Pardon?



What?


----------



## Orang Utan (Dec 2, 2019)

Why would a corrupt organisation whose function is to buttress the establishment be reluctant to investigate the crimes of a member of the royal family?


----------



## xenon (Dec 2, 2019)

Because Brexit.
Corbyn is an anti-Semite.

<youtube link>


----------



## Buckaroo (Dec 2, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> Why would a corrupt organisation whose function is to buttress the establishment be reluctant to investigate the crimes of a member of the royal family?



Because they want to pardon those crimes and the rest.


----------



## Orang Utan (Dec 2, 2019)

Buckaroo said:


> Because they want to pardon those crimes and the rest.


eh? it's not their job to pardon crimes.


----------



## Buckaroo (Dec 3, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> eh? it's not their job to pardon crimes.



Yeah, well in a way it is but I just used the word 'pardon' because that other fella did but not in the same sense if you get my drift whatever.


----------



## Badgers (Dec 3, 2019)

Anyone fancy a pint:


----------



## Ming (Dec 3, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Anyone fancy a pint:


Welcome...TO PAEDOGEDDON!!!
ETA: sp


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 3, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Anyone fancy a pint:


_And this is where you pay...in sweat._


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 3, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Anyone fancy a pint:


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 3, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> _And this is where you pay...in sweat._


it looks like people have bled all over those seats


----------



## fishfinger (Dec 3, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> it looks like people have bled all over those seats


I hear that it's because he never uses lube


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 3, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Anyone fancy a pint:



Do they serve under-age drinkers?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 3, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> _And this is where you pay...in sweat._



i think it's fair to say andrew's been in once or twice


----------



## Buddy Bradley (Dec 3, 2019)

Prince Andrew's bombshell email to Ghislaine Maxwell uncovered


----------



## gosub (Dec 3, 2019)

UrbaneFox said:


> According to The Times today, when Prince Philip retired Buckingham Palace wrote to the Grenadier Guards asking if they would like to have Prince Andrew as their patron.
> 
> The Guards wrote back asking if they had any other royal instead. The Palace was furious and insisted they invite Prince Andrew.
> 
> Made me smile, anyway.



Think that was more about pointless hill marches


----------



## Athos (Dec 3, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> The MET not investigating seems very strange.



Why? What has he been accused of that amounts to a criminal offence in this jurisdiction?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 3, 2019)

Athos said:


> Why? What has he been accused of that amounts to a criminal offence in this jurisdiction?



Raping a minor.


----------



## Athos (Dec 3, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Raping a minor.



I think that, by her own account, she was over 16, and ostensibly consented.

I'm not defending him, or his actions, but the police can't investigate absent a _prima facie_ crime.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 3, 2019)

Athos said:


> I think that, by her own account, she was over 16, and ostensibly consented.
> 
> I'm not defending him, or his actions, but the police can't investigate absent a _prima facie_ crime.



Her claim is she was trafficked to the UK against her will to be used as a prostitute aged 17. Take your pick of what crimes anyone who had sex with her under those circumstances has committed. Rape of a minor applies.


----------



## Badgers (Dec 3, 2019)




----------



## Chilli.s (Dec 3, 2019)

G Maxwell probably more likely to be technically criminal, some sort of prostitution offence.


----------



## Athos (Dec 3, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Her claim is she was trafficked to the UK against her will to be used as a prostitute aged 17. Take your pick of what crimes anyone who had sex with her under those circumstances has committed. Rape of a minor applies.



Err... 16 was the age of consent, then.  And nothing in her account that gives rise to a reasonable suspicion that he did not believe that she consented.

And there's no suggestion that Andrew trafficked her - that was Epstein and Maxwell.

Regretfully, as seedy as his conduct was, it's far from clear that, even if what she says is true (and I suspect it is) it would amount to a crime on Andrew's part.

Which is why the MPS are able to decline to investigate.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 3, 2019)

The most obvious prima facie crime is by Maxwell - sex trafficking, pimping. If PA knew about that, of course, he's in shit as well, but he'd surely be a _person of interest _in any investigation into Maxwell. Put it this way, if it were you or me whose bestie mates were being investigated for running a sex trafficking ring and it was alleged that they gave me girls from that ring for me to have sex with in their house, we'd be feeling the heat.

And let's face it, _that_ is why they also haven't investigated _her_.


----------



## maomao (Dec 3, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Her claim is she was trafficked to the UK against her will to be used as a prostitute aged 17. Take your pick of what crimes anyone who had sex with her under those circumstances has committed. Rape of a minor applies.


Age of consent usually counts as where you are rather than what it is where you're from.


----------



## equationgirl (Dec 3, 2019)

fishfinger said:


> I hear that it's because he never uses lube


I think this attempt at humour is somewhat off target.

Coerced or forced sex just isn't funny. And this isn't the first thread on urban recently where a male poster has made such a 'joke' leaving more than one female urb feeling distinctly uncomfortable (at best) if not downright creeped out.

So can this behaviour stop?


----------



## fishfinger (Dec 3, 2019)

OK


----------



## equationgirl (Dec 3, 2019)

Thank you.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 3, 2019)

Athos said:


> Err... 16 was the age of consent, then.  And nothing in her account that gives rise to a reasonable suspicion that he did not believe that she consented.



Errr...the age a prostitute must be in the UK is 18. And the fact she states quite clearly that she felt coerced in to travelling with Maxwell and Epstein is the bit where, you know, consent is not given



> And there's no suggestion that Andrew trafficked her - that was Epstein and Maxwell.



And?

Shag a woman trafficked to the UK against her will and you can find yourself in very hot water.




> Regretfully, as seedy as his conduct was, it's far from clear that, even if what she says is true (and I suspect it is) it would amount to a crime on Andrew's part.
> 
> Which is why the MPS are able to decline to investigate.



It's a long-shot he'll get done even if all she said is proved categorically. But it is very much on the line of quite serious criminality, which is why he's coming out with his load of old fanny.

And the MPS has no interest in investigating any senior royal for serious offences, quite the opposite in fact. Had these allegations been made against an ordinary Joe they would at least have a nosey to see what the hullabaloo is all about.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 3, 2019)

maomao said:


> Age of consent usually counts as where you are rather than what it is where you're from.





> the age a prostitute must be in the UK is 18.


----------



## Athos (Dec 3, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The most obvious prima facie crime is by Maxwell - sex trafficking, pimping. If PA knew about that, of course, he's in shit as well, but he'd surely be a _person of interest _in any investigation into Maxwell. Put it this way, if it were you or me whose bestie mates were being investigated for running a sex trafficking ring and it was alleged that they gave me girls from that ring for me to have sex with in their house, we'd be feeling the heat.



Maybe, but maybe not if there was an extant investigation by a friendly country with a better claim to primacy e.g. the US investigating a crime by a (dual) US citizen, with a US accomplice, and US victims, where most of the ongoing conduct took place in the US.  I mean it's quite possible that they're covering up for him, or are scared of another Carl Beech situation, but, on the face of it, they've got an 'out.'


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 3, 2019)

There's really no 'maybe' about it. Of course, the Met is going to look for and take any 'out' they can get. But let's not fool ourselves - if they can't find a good one, they'll just invent a bullshit one.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 3, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Errr...the age a prostitute must be in the UK is 18. And the fact she states quite clearly that she felt coerced in to travelling with Maxwell and Epstein is the bit where, you know, consent is not given
> 
> 
> 
> ...


frankly we all know that there's zero chance of anything happening to the royal nonce.

the remainder of the royal family are desperate to put it behind them. but this isn't going to go away.

it's how it affects the royal family, the monarchy as an institution. it won't bring them down. but it's removed a few jenga pieces from the tower.


----------



## Athos (Dec 3, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse what specific offence (by reference to the legislation in force at the time) do you say is made out against him if what Virginia Roberts says is true?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 3, 2019)

Athos said:


> Bahnhof Strasse what specific offence (by reference to the legislation in force at the time) do you say is made ot against him if what Virginia Roberts says is true?



Being a parasitic royal cunt.

And having sex with an underage prostitute.

I think the strict liability law for shagging a woman trafficking in to the UK against her will can't be added retrospectively to that time, but a charge of rape could be.


----------



## D'wards (Dec 3, 2019)

Is it possible that Andrew did have sex with her but was unaware she was trafficked in and she was put upto it by Epstein and Maxwell? 
They may have instructed her to do it as a party favour,  or even to get something on him as Epstein was known to do


----------



## Saunders (Dec 3, 2019)

fishfinger said:


> I hear that it's because he never uses lube


Is that supposed to be a humorous comment? Because it’s like saying ‘I hear it’s because he fucks them so roughly they bleed.’

Taking the odious Andrew out of this for a minute, how has it become so normalised to say such a thing in a ‘Hur Hur snigger snigger’ way? Titter titter lube tee hee.

Men using their cocks as instruments of damage or scorn is NOT FUCKING FUNNY.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 3, 2019)

D'wards said:


> Is it possible that Andrew did have sex with her but was unaware she was trafficked in and she was put upto it by Epstein and Maxwell?
> They may have instructed her to do it as a party favour,  or even to get something on him as Epstein was known to do


I would say it is very possible he had sex with/raped her without giving a single fuck about who she was, why she was there, or anything else to do with her. Self-obsessed, narcissistic cunt that he very clearly is.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 3, 2019)

D'wards said:


> Is it possible that Andrew did have sex with her but was unaware she was trafficked in and she was put upto it by Epstein and Maxwell?
> They may have instructed her to do it as a party favour,  or even to get something on him as Epstein was known to do



Today there is a thing in law called a Strict Liability Offence, where he would be guilty even if he had no idea at all and could prove that. It didn't apply back then though, AFAIK.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 3, 2019)

Badgers said:


>



is that cheeky ghislane maxwell poking her head in on the right hand side?


----------



## D'wards (Dec 3, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> is that cheeky ghislane maxwell poking her head in on the right hand side?


Andrew's jacket is covered in powder. Defo not the photo


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 3, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> is that cheeky ghislane maxwell poking her head in on the right hand side?



Naturally.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 3, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> is that cheeky ghislane maxwell poking her head in on the right hand side?


At least 50% nonce, there.


----------



## nyxx (Dec 3, 2019)

equationgirl said:


> I think this attempt at humour is somewhat off target.
> 
> Coerced or forced sex just isn't funny. And this isn't the first thread on urban recently where a male poster has made such a 'joke' leaving more than one female urb feeling distinctly uncomfortable (at best) if not downright creeped out.
> 
> So can this behaviour stop?



Thank you. That comment made me feel quite sick.


----------



## Athos (Dec 3, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Being a parasitic royal cunt.
> 
> And having sex with an underage prostitute.
> 
> I think the strict liability law for shagging a woman trafficking in to the UK against her will can't be added retrospectively to that time, but a charge of rape could be.



Utter drivel.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 3, 2019)

Athos said:


> Utter drivel.



Incisive and convulsive there.

As per on threads about rapey fuckers, where you pop up like a fucking jack in the box as soon as the heat gets turned on to the sleezoid perp with your pseudo-legal challenges to the creepy cunts.


----------



## Athos (Dec 3, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Incisive and convulsive there.
> 
> As per on threads about rapey fuckers, where you pop up like a fucking jack in the box as soon as the heat gets turned on to the sleezoid perp with your pseudo-legal challenges to the creepy cunts.



What the fuck are you wittering about, you clown?

The question of what offences were on the statute book at the time is a wholly legal question, not a 'pseudo-legal' one.

And me explaining (to others who'd asked) some plausible reasons the police might give for not investigating Andrew* - the fact that, on the face of it, he's not committed any offence which they have jurisdiction to investigate, and the probable extant investigation into Maxwell in the US - isn't me defending him.  Indeed, I've explicitly criticised his conduct, and said I believe Virginia Roberts' version of events.

I hate the royals, and would love to see him get sent down.  But nobody is helped by the sort of ill-informed wishful thinking you're peddaling.  What you're saying about the law is just flat-out wrong.

And, for the record, if you look through my previous posts on the law around rape, you'll see I've been very critical of how it fails victims generally, and of some specific high-profile acquittals (e.g. see the Ched Evans thread).

*without denying that they probably try to find away out, even if this wasn't the case.


----------



## UrbaneFox (Dec 3, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> is that cheeky ghislane maxwell poking her head in on the right hand side?


Who would have thought Maxwell's daughter could be so dismissive of human beings, and that when she spoke to Sarah Ransom it was 'as though she had shit on her shoes'?

Donald Trump must have been almost fragrant standing alongside this lot


----------



## Marty1 (Dec 3, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I would say it is very possible he had sex with/raped her without giving a single fuck about who she was, why she was there, or anything else to do with her. Self-obsessed, narcissistic cunt that he very clearly is.



Virginia Guiffre said as much in her interview with Panorama, they (PA, Maxwell & Epstein) treat them like (sex) objects at their disposal, totally dehumanising.

Well, Epstein is dead, PA’s life/public life is in tatters and Maxwell has fallen off the planet so it’s good to see justice of sorts catching them up from all those years ago when they thought they were untouchable to do as they please.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 3, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> What was the £15k loan to Fergie all about? He spends £12k on a flight to New York to scrounge £15k off a nonce. Bit whiffy.


How dare you use facts to undermine a Prince of the realm! 

In the Maitliss interview his brane realised these figures didn't add up so went with the 'I'm too honourable to tell a nonce I don't want to be his friend anymore so had to go and spend 5 days in nonce mansions' line. I've always held the naive notion that when members of the elite want to cover their tracks they can manipulate the evidence at the level of the small details. But it really does look Paedipus Rex is on his own with this, left on his own to come up increasing levels of absurdity and noncesense. Never mind getting fabricated royal protection logs to give him an alibi, he can't even get a fake Pizza Express receipt.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 3, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Errr...the age a prostitute must be in the UK is 18. And the fact she states quite clearly that she felt coerced in to travelling with Maxwell and Epstein is the bit where, you know, consent is not given
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Also, there seems to be a pattern  of women being 'provided' for windsor by epstein. I'm not going to hunt the links down but I think Virginia Roberts is the 3rd I've heard mention of (though I've no idea whether she was 1st, 2nd or third of the 3, chronologically). Regardless of whether evidential thresholds were passed, it's pretty clear that windsor knew what the crack was - the paedo was pimping women out to him on a regular basis.

Oh, and yes, Dershovitz is scum personified.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 3, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I would say it is very possible he had sex with/raped her without giving a single fuck about who she was, why she was there, or anything else to do with her. Self-obsessed, narcissistic cunt that he very clearly is.


I think that's true about his attitude to her and indeed all the other 'servants' he described ignoring in the interview. I suspect it's also _literally _true in the Roberts case. He was used to having women provided, literally a non issue for him. It would have needed an entirely alien world view for him to ask why she had ended up in a mansion being farmed out to him.

There's a dark irony in that really. He comes from a family that has mastered one single skill: _asking members of the public who they are and where they are from._


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 3, 2019)

Athos said:


> What the fuck are you wittering about, you clown?
> .


You miss the point, I think. Why isn't any of this being investigated? That's the question here. It's not just about Nosweat Andrew. Except, of course, that it is all about Nosweat Andrew. He's the reason none of this is being investigated. Without him, Maxwell and no doubt others would be in big trouble. But they can't be in trouble without him being in trouble. That's the calculation.


----------



## Humberto (Dec 4, 2019)

It's the fact that we have a queen. A fucking _queen_ ffs.

Then this shit. Beyond embarrassing.


----------



## Humberto (Dec 4, 2019)

I mean how the fuck are you 'the queen'? Or by what right or authority?

Absolute titheadedness.


----------



## two sheds (Dec 4, 2019)

Humberto said:


> I mean how the fuck are you 'the queen'? Or by what right or authority?



She hasn't got shit all over her


----------



## Wilf (Dec 4, 2019)

two sheds said:


> She hasn't got shit all over her


To be honest, Mark Oaten's claim to the throne was always on shaky ground. After the initial smears he was very soon on the skids.


----------



## Humberto (Dec 4, 2019)

HOW DARE YOU etc

imply the queen is a nonegenarion shitehawk indeed. i shall be writing to the Express.


----------



## dessiato (Dec 4, 2019)

As much as I am anti-royalist the Queen does seem to be the last of the really decent ones, although there seems to be less scandal attached to both Anne and Edward than the others. Let's be done with these parasites. Make them learn an honest trade and work for a living.


----------



## Calamity1971 (Dec 4, 2019)

dessiato said:


> As much as I am anti-royalist the Queen does seem to be the last of the really decent ones


Nah, she's a cunt as well.


----------



## Calamity1971 (Dec 4, 2019)

How is she decent dessiato ?


----------



## maomao (Dec 4, 2019)

Calamity1971 said:


> How is she decent dessiato ?


Doesn't say much. That's always been her greatest PR trick. Keeping her mouth shut.


----------



## Athos (Dec 4, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> You miss the point, I think. Why isn't any of this being investigated? That's the question here. It's not just about Nosweat Andrew. Except, of course, that it is all about Nosweat Andrew. He's the reason none of this is being investigated. Without him, Maxwell and no doubt others would be in big trouble. But they can't be in trouble without him being in trouble. That's the calculation.



I'm not sure I share your confidence about the vigour with which the police would've investigated an historic case of a man having sex with a 17 year old, even if he'd not been involved.  Albeit I accept that's an added impetus to kick it into the long grass.  My earlier posts were really to explain the plausible reasons on which they might rely. Sadly, we're can't just wish them away.


----------



## TopCat (Dec 4, 2019)

maomao said:


> Doesn't say much. That's always been her greatest PR trick. Keeping her mouth shut.


Queen mum spoke less and she was not a simple racist cunt but an overt Nazi supporter.  Horrific. Kill them all.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2019)

dessiato said:


> As much as I am anti-royalist the Queen does seem to be the last of the really decent ones, although there seems to be less scandal attached to both Anne and Edward than the others. Let's be done with these parasites. Make them learn an honest trade and work for a living.


No. Let's feed their corpses, processed into pellets, to the penguins

That would be the most useful thing they could do, keep some penguins fed for a few days


----------



## maomao (Dec 4, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Queen mum spoke less and she was not a simple racist cunt but an overt Nazi supporter.  Horrific. Kill them all.


With her it was so no one would notice the drunken slurring. It's a tragedy she lived such a long and happy life.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Dec 4, 2019)

I remember reading that adrian mole woman's book about the monarchy being abolished and sent to live on a council estate somewhere in the west midlands, I was about ten or something, and even then couldn't get my head around why we wouldn't just robespierre them. Book would have been shorter but better.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 4, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> No. Let's feed their corpses, processed into pellets, to the penguins
> 
> That would be the most useful thing they could do, keep some penguins fed for a few days


Fine start to the day.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 4, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I remember reading that adrian mole woman's book about the monarchy being abolished and sent to live on a council estate somewhere in the west midlands, I was about ten or something, and even then couldn't get my head around why we wouldn't just robespierre them. Book would have been shorter but better.


I read that. Sue Townsend. The Queen and I.

(I’d have been late twenties. Don’t you OK boomer me!)


----------



## krtek a houby (Dec 4, 2019)

Should the killing of nazi supporters be just confined to the royals/elites or should it be across the board, like?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Dec 4, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I read that. Sue Townsend. The Queen and I.
> 
> (I’d have been late twenties. Don’t you OK boomer me!)


Alright grandad


----------



## Proper Tidy (Dec 4, 2019)

krtek a houby said:


> Should the killing of nazi supporters be just confined to the royals/elites or should it be across the board, like?


All but let's prioritise the bluebloods


----------



## fishfinger (Dec 4, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> All but let's prioritise the bluebloods


Pour encourager les autres.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 4, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I remember reading that adrian mole woman's book about the monarchy being abolished and sent to live on a council estate somewhere in the west midlands, I was about ten or something, and even then couldn't get my head around why we wouldn't just robespierre them. Book would have been shorter but better.





danny la rouge said:


> I read that. Sue Townsend. The Queen and I.
> 
> (I’d have been late twenties. Don’t you OK boomer me!)



The idea of them being moved to a council house was first mooted in the Secret Diary of Adrian Mole aged 13 3/4, it was suggested that they be relocated to Liverpool.


----------



## krtek a houby (Dec 4, 2019)

Not being one for the old executions lark, I'd be up for them to be relocated to somewhere where they can live their lives without bothering anyone else.

Kandor, for example.


----------



## flypanam (Dec 4, 2019)

Looks like Andrew isn't the only Andrew in Epstein's black book, allegedly, one Andrew Neil was a well known chum of JE.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The idea of them being moved to a council house was first mooted in the Secret Diary of Adrian Mole aged 13 3/4, it was suggested that they be relocated to Liverpool.


whereas what's on the cards is relocation to the south

as marty21 can no doubt confirm, their behaviour would see them ejected from social housing within a matter of hours of their arrival


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 4, 2019)

flypanam said:


> Looks like Andrew isn't the only Andrew in Epstein's black book, allegedly, one Andrew Neil was a well known chum of JE.


And with an AOL email address.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Dec 4, 2019)

flypanam said:


> Looks like Andrew isn't the only Andrew in Epstein's black book, allegedly, one Andrew Neil was a well known chum of JE.


<insert obligatory andrew neil sex tourist photo here>


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2019)




----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 4, 2019)

Urgh, my fucking eyes


----------



## Celyn (Dec 4, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I remember reading that adrian mole woman's book about the monarchy being abolished and sent to live on a council estate somewhere in the west midlands, I was about ten or something, and even then couldn't get my head around why we wouldn't just robespierre them. Book would have been shorter but better.


The book could have been better if it hadn't been so grovellingly fond of them all. And I seem to recall that the  republican prime minister was a baddie and everything was fine for the royals in the end.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Dec 4, 2019)

Celyn said:


> The book could have been better if it hadn't been so grovellingly fond of them all. And I seem to recall that the  republican prime minister was a baddie and everything was fine for the royals in the end.


Yeah it's been a long time since I read it but I recall it being quite sympathetic to brenda while iirc diana was a bit of an arsehole and her kids were little shits


----------



## Marty1 (Dec 4, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


>



Is that one of those deep fakes?


----------



## killer b (Dec 4, 2019)

The Queen and I was a dreadful book. Forelock tugging filth. And it finished in the laziest way possible, with it all having been a dream.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 4, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Is that one of those deep fakes?


Nope. Very famous, totally real image.


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Dec 4, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> ....while iirc diana was a bit of an arsehole and her kids were little shits



Which is probably about right.


----------



## Casual Observer (Dec 4, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Is that one of those deep fakes?


Taken by Terry O'Neill who died a couple of weeks ago.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 4, 2019)

I remember being disappointed by it. I thought she’d missed an opportunity and been too sycophantic. But I don’t remember a great deal more than that.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Dec 4, 2019)

I'd like to reiterate I was about ten and was probably still sticking lego up my arse and refusing to eat brocolli


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 4, 2019)

So if Epstein was (one of, I assume) the main suppliers of girls for the rich...who's supplying boys?  That must be happening as well, surely?


----------



## Celyn (Dec 5, 2019)

killer b said:


> The Queen and I was a dreadful book. Forelock tugging filth. And it finished in the laziest way possible, with it all having been a dream.


Aha! Thanks, killer b. I did have the recollection that "it was all a dream" but I assumed I must be remembering wrongly on the grounds that it surely couldn't have been that bad. But it seems that it WAS that bad.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2019)

Celyn said:


> Aha! Thanks, killer b. I did have the recollection that "it was all a dream" but I assumed I must be remembering wrongly on the grounds that it surely couldn't have been that bad. But it seems that it WAS that bad.


it was worse


----------



## teqniq (Dec 5, 2019)




----------



## D'wards (Dec 5, 2019)

My pal is head groundskeeper at a public school. Old Andy was patron. 
He came and planted a tree in spring with a small ceremony. 
The school has now cut all ties with PA. He's quite pleased as the wallabes keep eating the Prince Andrew tree and now he can fuck the plaque off and move it to a safe place.


----------



## MrSki (Dec 6, 2019)

New sex shocker on front of tomorrow's Mirror.


----------



## TopCat (Dec 7, 2019)

D'wards said:


> My pal is head groundskeeper at a public school. Old Andy was patron.
> He came and planted a tree in spring with a small ceremony.
> The school has now cut all ties with PA. He's quite pleased as the wallabes keep eating the Prince Andrew tree and now he can fuck the plaque off and move it to a safe place.


Whitgift eh? The school that has all Croydon's resources whilst the other schools cupboards are bare.
The head is the biggest royal dick sucking creep ever. To do this must have hurt him so much.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 7, 2019)

MrSki said:


> New sex shocker on front of tomorrow's Mirror.


tbh it's not much of a shocker now we know he has form


----------



## TopCat (Dec 7, 2019)

MrSki said:


> New sex shocker on front of tomorrow's Mirror.


Clue?


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Dec 7, 2019)




----------



## dessiato (Dec 7, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Clue?


It's another woman coming forward to say he abused/raped her. 

There's more to come I suspect. 

He needs to vanish quietly. Or have the balls to confront his accusers in a fair trial. (Not that that'd ever be possible or likely)


----------



## TopCat (Dec 7, 2019)

dessiato said:


> It's another woman coming forward to say he abused/raped her.
> 
> There's more to come I suspect.
> 
> He needs to vanish quietly. Or have the balls to confront his accusers in a fair trial. (Not that that'd ever be possible or likely)


He can't vanish. This wont go away. It's suicide or mystery death.


----------



## TopCat (Dec 7, 2019)

I bet fatal heart attack within 12 months. I'm offering odds. pm me.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Dec 7, 2019)

TopCat said:


> I bet fatal heart attack within 12 months. I'm offering odds. pm me.



Deffo a candidate on my sleb death pool five for the coming year!


----------



## teqniq (Dec 7, 2019)

TopCat said:


> I bet fatal heart attack within 12 months. I'm offering odds. pm me.



Haha. I'm not a betting man but I find that scenario unlikely. This is a royal we're talking about here. I am of course happy to be proved wrong.


----------



## TopCat (Dec 7, 2019)

teqniq said:


> Haha. I'm not a betting man but I find that scenario unlikely. This is a royal we're talking about here. I am of course happy to be proved wrong.


I offer you 6/1.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Dec 7, 2019)

TopCat said:


> I bet fatal heart attack within 12 months. I'm offering odds. pm me.



Or a car crash, perhaps in a tunnel?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 7, 2019)

teqniq said:


> Haha. I'm not a betting man but I find that scenario unlikely. This is a royal we're talking about here. I am of course happy to be proved wrong.


Exactly. It's a royal. So he can't go to any kind of trial. It's the very people who are currently trying to protect him that he needs to be afraid of if their protection starts to fail.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 7, 2019)

dessiato said:


> It's another woman coming forward to say he abused/raped her.
> 
> There's more to come I suspect.
> 
> He needs to vanish quietly. Or have the balls to confront his accusers in a fair trial. (Not that that'd ever be possible or likely)


there may come a time when the nonce andrew facing a trial may be seen by the royal family as less of a danger than new stories emerging and damaging not only andrew but the rest of the foul windsor clan.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 7, 2019)

teqniq said:


> Haha. I'm not a betting man but I find that scenario unlikely. This is a royal we're talking about here. I am of course happy to be proved wrong.



Falling off the top of an It’s a Royal Knockout inflatable.


----------



## andysays (Dec 7, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Falling off the top of an It’s a Royal Knockout inflatable.


Choking on garlic bread at Pizza Express


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 7, 2019)

andysays said:


> Choking on garlic bread at Pizza Express


drown him in a barrel of malmsey

other ideas from shakespeare can be found in theatre of blood


----------



## MickiQ (Dec 7, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Or a car crash, perhaps in a tunnel?


They've already done that one they will need to think of a new one


----------



## DaveCinzano (Dec 7, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> They've already done that one they will need to think of a new one


Snakes on a plane?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 7, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> They've already done that one they will need to think of a new one


My money would be on a helicopter crash. Notoriously dangerous, helicopters.


----------



## clicker (Dec 7, 2019)

Knocked over by a Dominoes moped.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Dec 7, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> My money would be on a helicopter crash. Notoriously dangerous, helicopters.


Sweat Nonce Down?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Dec 7, 2019)

Noncefinder general. Boil him, if he sweats he's guilty, if he doesn't he's innocent and will go to heaven


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Dec 7, 2019)

He'll be found dead in his bed.


----------



## Buckaroo (Dec 7, 2019)

Chokes to death on a plastic toy in a Christmas cracker.


----------



## equationgirl (Dec 7, 2019)

Hunting accident.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Dec 7, 2019)

I reckon it'll be an accident at a not so 'straightforward shooting weekend'.


----------



## xenon (Dec 7, 2019)

The salmon mousse.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Dec 7, 2019)

xenon said:


> The salmon mousse.




Or.....the fish paste sandwich.....hmmm


----------



## brogdale (Dec 7, 2019)

Was fish bones when they were trying to get rid of that fash Bowes-Lyon woman.


----------



## DJWrongspeed (Dec 7, 2019)

The obvious comment is......why do we care about an outdated institution ?


----------



## Orang Utan (Dec 7, 2019)

DJWrongspeed said:


> The obvious comment is......why do we care about an outdated institution ?


cos it protects and facilitates noncery?


----------



## Marty1 (Dec 7, 2019)

Choke on his privilege.


----------



## agricola (Dec 7, 2019)

a surfeit of peaches and cider


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 7, 2019)

gout.


----------



## Buckaroo (Dec 7, 2019)

Paedo hunter gangs


----------



## Orang Utan (Dec 7, 2019)

Old age


----------



## souljacker (Dec 7, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> Old age



This. He'll get farmed out to Martinique like his aunt to spend his time fucking young girls and snorting Ching. Probably live into his 90s


----------



## Celyn (Dec 8, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> My money would be on a helicopter crash. Notoriously dangerous, helicopters.


Ooh!  Yes, they are. However, please can this helicopter crash NOT be upon the roof of a really good Glasgow pub? We only want Prince Andrew dead, not 10 people.

Of course I don't want him dead. Yet. I want him in a court. As do we all. 

I wonder, though, if it might come to pass that the Royals and Powers That Be might end up finding that giving up Andrew to proper investigation would be a worthwhile move to preserve the rest of them.

Not going to happen, though.

How about a ski-ing accident?

Or a golf accident? He likes golf, doesn't he? So he could be unfortunately struck by lightning. But now I am remembering the "Father Ted" thing where the horribly boring priest was struck by lightning at the crazy golf. He survived. Obviously it would be better if Andrew was struck by lightning where no cameras were and the first people on the scene just made sure that nothing could be done to save him.


----------



## Celyn (Dec 8, 2019)

agricola said:


> a surfeit of peaches and cider


But that sounds quite enjoyable really. I had never thought of the two together, but imagine on a really hot summer day to sit down with some proper cider and then cool and juicy peaches. Possibly then there could be some cold ham or cheese, a cool green salad, good bread ... really, this sounds very appealing.

Is there a reason why you would favour this over the traditional surfeit of lampreys?


----------



## tim (Dec 8, 2019)

The full Edward II (a red hot poker up the bum).


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Dec 8, 2019)

Are the royals immune to prosecution? Is there no chance the shit will see jail time?


----------



## dessiato (Dec 8, 2019)

tim said:


> The full Edward II (a red hot poker up the bum).


I've learned something today. What an awful way to die.


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Dec 8, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Are the royals immune to prosecution? Is there no chance the shit will see jail time?


Brenda is, but not the rest as far as I know.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Dec 8, 2019)

farmerbarleymow said:


> Brenda is, but not the rest as far as I know.



That was my understanding, but looks like the rest are also immune in civil proceedings, but not criminal cases.  



> The monarch is immune from arrest in all cases; members of the royal household are immune from arrest in civil proceedings.[37] No arrest can be made "in the monarch's presence", or within the "verges" of a royal palace. When a royal palace is used as a residence (regardless of whether the monarch is actually living there at the time), judicial processes cannot be executed within that palace.[38]
> 
> The monarch's goods cannot be taken under a writ of execution, nor can distress be levied on land in their possession. Chattels owned by the Crown, but present on another's land, cannot be taken in execution or for distress. The Crown is not subject to foreclosure.[39]
> 
> Sovereign immunity - Wikipedia



But, no arrests can be made within a royal palace, so we could see him holed up, Assange style.


----------



## Celyn (Dec 8, 2019)

dessiato said:


> I've learned something today. What an awful way to die.


Well, if it makes you feel better, it is really unlikely to have happened. Bit of a myth, really. However, were the peasants and rebels of the time only killed in nice gentle painfree ways?

Anyway, it is such a long-time belief that everyone knows about it (apart from dessiato, I suppose), and without it, how would we ever had had "Edward II and the Red Hot Polkas"?
Edward II (band) - Wikipedia


----------



## Celyn (Dec 8, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> ..
> 
> But, no arrests can be made within a royal palace, so we could see him holed up, Assange style.


Ah! Good point there.

However, surely Assange style would tricky because it would depend upon some place agreeing to take him in.

I think, given that he is, after all a Royal person, something more in keeping with tradition should be done. I can think of a least one bottle dungeon and I am sure there are more.


----------



## dessiato (Dec 8, 2019)

If it's all true, and I don't doubt it is, perhaps he could be "encouraged" to party himself to death. Although I find it hard to imagine anyone wanting to be seen to be partying with him now.


----------



## Celyn (Dec 8, 2019)

dessiato said:


> If it's all true, and I don't doubt it is, perhaps he could be "encouraged" to party himself to death. Although I find it hard to imagine anyone wanting to be seen to be partying with him now.


Especially as he never knows the way to the bar.


----------



## Celyn (Dec 8, 2019)

dessiato said:


> If it's all true, and I don't doubt it is, perhaps he could be "encouraged" to party himself to death. Although I find it hard to imagine anyone wanting to be seen to be partying with him now.


You could have hit on the right idea there. Keep giving him enough white powder, amounts you could ski on, then "oh dear, sudden heart attack" and "please do not discuss Prince Andrew at this very sad time for his family". Then a convenient new royal pregnancy.


----------



## Celyn (Dec 8, 2019)

Actually, on second thoughts, yes the convenient new pregnancy, BUT things more quickly to arrange - the Queen has got a new dog! with an amazing break from tradition, she has adopted a very sad little puppy from the local dog rescue place. It looks very nice and just look at those soulful brown eyes. Forget other things now! 

But even more likely would be some announcement that the queen has some sort of health problem, bit of heart trouble, nothing serious but it means that all right-thinking good British people must not mention her son because of not wanting to stress the dear old queen.


----------



## tim (Dec 8, 2019)

farmerbarleymow said:


> Brenda is, but not the rest as far as I know.


Charles I. thought he was immune


----------



## JimW (Dec 8, 2019)

From the man of blood to the man of sweat, may the latter end in tears too.


----------



## Celyn (Dec 8, 2019)

tim said:


> Charles I. thought he was immune


"Chairlie the first got beheided, Chairlie the second, he succeeded, Chairlie the Third will no be needed".


----------



## rekil (Dec 8, 2019)

He will attempt to redeem himself on the battlefield by leading a crowdfunded army of hoolies and ptsd'd raq'n'stan vets to recapture the falklands but will get simon westoned before even stepping foot on the beach.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Dec 8, 2019)

dessiato said:


> If it's all true, and I don't doubt it is, perhaps he could be "encouraged" to party himself to death. Although I find it hard to imagine anyone wanting to be seen to be partying with him now.



Maybe he'll drown in his own sweat?


----------



## Celyn (Dec 8, 2019)

It would be the honourable thing to do.


----------



## MrSki (Dec 8, 2019)

Who would have thought it?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 8, 2019)

MrSki said:


> Who would have thought it?



All you need is sir jimmy savile obe kcsg for a full house


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Dec 8, 2019)

MrSki said:


> Who would have thought it?






Pickman's model said:


> All you need is sir jimmy savile obe kcsg for a full house



The royals have made a habit of courting pedos for a long time.


----------



## Poi E (Dec 8, 2019)

Mountbatten was a paedo wasn't he?

I often think about the awful things colonial soldiers and administrators got up to in the Empire, and then they came back to Britain bringing all that filth and guilt with them. It must have fucked society here.


----------



## D'wards (Dec 8, 2019)

Miranda Sawyer on twitter thinks Maxwell is in with the FBI, who are presumably taking names and preparing cases.

There still may be a lot more to all this to come out


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Dec 8, 2019)

Who’s Miranda Sawyer?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Dec 8, 2019)

Mr.Bishie said:


> Who’s Miranda Sawyer?



She's a journalist and broadcaster.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 8, 2019)

MrSki said:


> Who would have thought it?




All the gang together


----------



## dessiato (Dec 8, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Maybe he'll drown in his own sweat?


He doesn't sweat, he says.


----------



## Orang Utan (Dec 8, 2019)

dessiato said:


> He doesn't sweat, he says.


----------



## extra dry (Dec 8, 2019)

How long will it carry on?


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Dec 8, 2019)

dessiato said:


> He doesn't sweat, he says.



Yeah....right....


----------



## Orang Utan (Dec 8, 2019)

extra dry said:


> How long will it carry on?


Will what carry on?


----------



## clicker (Dec 8, 2019)

His father of the bride speech should be interesting. Assuming all the fam will be there and the majority of them are probably fuming at having their privileged little world slightly rocked.


----------



## dylanredefined (Dec 8, 2019)

copliker said:


> He will attempt to redeem himself on the battlefield by leading a crowdfunded army of hoolies and ptsd'd raq'n'stan vets to recapture the falklands but will get simon westoned before even stepping foot on the beach.



  Well unless you got about 10 billion quid to rebuild the Argentiean military. Slight problem with that plan.
 Since being a Prince isn't a crime yet. What can he be charged with?


----------



## UrbaneFox (Dec 8, 2019)

clicker said:


> His father of the bride speech should be interesting. Assuming all the fam will be there and the majority of them are probably fuming at having their privileged little world slightly rocked.


He will doubtless use the speech to try to clear his name.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 8, 2019)

dylanredefined said:


> Well unless you got about 10 billion quid to rebuild the Argentiean military. Slight problem with that plan.
> Since being a Prince isn't a crime yet. What can he be charged with?




make it a crime


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 9, 2019)

dylanredefined said:


> Well unless you got about 10 billion quid to rebuild the Argentiean military. Slight problem with that plan.
> Since being a Prince isn't a crime yet. What can he be charged with?


No need to charge him with anything. His knowledge of the south atlantic will prove invaluable in the development of the south atlantic industrial zone and now he's withdrawn from public life there is nothing to prevent him taking up a well-paid post (7 fish a week) overseeing the drainage of Falkland sound.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 9, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> make it a crime


(((prince naseem)))


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 9, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> make it a crime


It’s already admission of crimes.


----------



## Idris2002 (Dec 9, 2019)

dylanredefined said:


> Well unless you got about 10 billion quid to rebuild the Argentiean military. Slight problem with that plan.
> Since being a Prince isn't a crime yet. What can he be charged with?


If he hung around with the likes of Epstein, then he's dirty for something, of that you may be sure.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 9, 2019)

Idris2002 said:


> If he hung around with the likes of Epstein, then he's dirty for something, of that you may be sure.


whatever filthy things he may have done, he will expiate his sins through labour at falkland sound.


----------



## Marty1 (Dec 9, 2019)

According to Edit, Ghislaine Maxwell is preparing to do a tell all interview with a major US network to defend Prince Andrew!

Wonder how much she’ll be getting paid for this interview?


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 9, 2019)

Stop quoting the S*n.


----------



## Marty1 (Dec 9, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Stop quoting the S*n.



Ive changed it to edit.



Spoiler



By the way - the new photos of Epstein,Weinstein and Maxwell all have The edit’s watermark on them - how do you propose getting around that one as they are on this thread?


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 9, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Ive changed it to edit.
> 
> By the way - the new photos of Epstein,Weinstein and Maxwell all have The edit’s watermark on them - how do you propose getting around that one as they are on this thread?


I’d appeal to people to edit it out. The scum pissed on the bodies of dead Liverpool fans and can never be excused that.


----------



## Marty1 (Dec 9, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I’d appeal to people to edit it out. The scum pissed on the bodies of dead Liverpool fans and can never be excused that.



Fair enough, anyway back to topic, if Maxwell goes ahead with this interview it’s going to add more petrol to the already substantial fire no matter how many buckets of water she brings.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 9, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Fair enough, anyway back to topic, if Maxwell goes ahead with this interview it’s going to add more petrol to the already substantial fire no matter how many buckets of water she brings.


be more sand you'd want if people are chucking petrol onto a fire


----------



## Marty1 (Dec 9, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> be more sand you'd want if people are chucking petrol onto a fire



Quicksand?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 9, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Quicksand?


very rarely found anywhere near a fire


----------



## extra dry (Dec 9, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> No need to charge him with anything. His knowledge of the south atlantic will prove invaluable in the development of the south atlantic industrial zone and now he's withdrawn from public life there is nothing to prevent him taking up a well-paid post (7 fish a week) overseeing the drainage of Falkland sound.


Too risky, he likes islands. Plus I recon an accident will occur around the new year, Andrew in coma etc...


----------



## extra dry (Dec 9, 2019)

Its really weird, but in '94 or '95 I am sure I spoke to that Maxwell person. It is at mid day at King Cross, I remember it because it was strange and odd conversation about trains and special services, and that needed to get a drink...she started listing off drinks, but each for each drink that's too sweet, that's too sour, by the time the person is el5 why she doesn't like or would never like kwiw juice or milkshakes
  I walked away from the pair.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 9, 2019)

extra dry said:


> she started listing off drinks, but each for each drink that's too sweet, that's too sour, by the time the person is el5 why she doesn't like or would never like kwiw juice or milkshakes


What?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 9, 2019)

Lupa said:


> He'll be found dead in his bed.



"Heart attack" induced by an over-large injection of insulin, or of an air bubble.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 9, 2019)

extra dry said:


> Too risky, he likes islands. Plus I recon an accident will occur around the new year, Andrew in coma etc...


Prince Andrew in a penguin is anticipated after four weeks


----------



## Fez909 (Dec 13, 2019)

Prince Andrew accuser Virginia Giuffre says FBI have told her of 'credible' threat on her life


----------



## mwgdrwg (Dec 13, 2019)

Fez909 said:


> Prince Andrew accuser Virginia Giuffre says FBI have told her of 'credible' threat on her life


----------



## Fez909 (Dec 13, 2019)

mwgdrwg said:


> View attachment 192869


Proper pantomime baddies, the Royal Family, eh?







"We'll get you, my little pretty"


----------



## bluescreen (Dec 13, 2019)




----------



## Marty1 (Dec 21, 2019)

Missing footage near Epstein’s jail cell from when he died has been found.

Prosecutors Find 'Missing' Video From Jeffrey Epstein's Suicide Attempt | iHeartRadio

So it’s taken all this time to turn up, sounds fishy imo.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 21, 2019)

Fez909 said:


> Proper pantomime baddies, the Royal Family, eh?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Not so much a smile that doesn't reach the eyes as an insane murderous leer that does.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 22, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> What?


It’s a Bot of New York.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 22, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> It’s a Bot of New York.


I should know the score by now; I’m a native New Yorker.


----------



## gosub (Dec 27, 2019)

Revealed: Duke of York set up secret investment fund under assumed name 'Andrew Inverness'

  I had to check but its about a month and a half since Prince Andrew was explaining about his tendency of being too honourable


----------



## Santino (Dec 27, 2019)

Found Andrew's arch-enemies:


----------



## kenny g (Dec 27, 2019)

gosub said:


> Revealed: Duke of York set up secret investment fund under assumed name 'Andrew Inverness'
> 
> I had to check but its about a month and a half since Prince Andrew was explaining about his tendency of being too honourable



Interesting and wasn't aware of this. Looks like the Telegraph's piece is recycled from the Mail How Duke used pseudonym to set up secret firm with sports tycoon | Daily Mail Online

Companies House record is here NAPLES GOLD LIMITED - Officers (free information from Companies House)

And "Andrew Inverness"'s Director form is here https://s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/...c40389ba03e4c00b75e8fe4fe24e06f63dae9e1d9944a


----------



## brogdale (Dec 27, 2019)

kenny g said:


> Interesting and wasn't aware of this. Looks like the Telegraph's piece is recycled from the Mail How Duke used pseudonym to set up secret firm with sports tycoon | Daily Mail Online
> 
> Companies House record is here NAPLES GOLD LIMITED - Officers (free information from Companies House)
> 
> And "Andrew Inverness"'s Director form is here https://s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/document-api-images-live.ch.gov.uk/docs/4z-s8ErVIX9Z379NkcGrwvJnyTbZokldsp_dYZKkUGk/application-pdf?X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Content-Sha256=UNSIGNED-PAYLOAD&X-Amz-Credential=ASIAWRGBDBV3MLAWY2ML/20191227/eu-west-2/s3/aws4_request&X-Amz-Date=20191227T145047Z&X-Amz-Expires=60&X-Amz-Security-Token=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&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&X-Amz-Signature=9bfda18e4099b69c903c40389ba03e4c00b75e8fe4fe24e06f63dae9e1d9944a


No idea about such matters...but is it OK to set up/register a company under an assumed name? Mind you, I'm assuming that the name is assumed...maybe the RF can call themselves what they like?


----------



## kenny g (Dec 27, 2019)

brogdale said:


> No idea about such matters...but is it OK to set up/register a company under an assumed name? Mind you, I'm assuming that the name is assumed...maybe the RF can call themselves what they like?



In English law anyone can pretty much call themselves whatever they like as long as it is not for a fraudulent purpose. The most obvious Fraud Act 2006 offences arising where there is a dishonest misrepresentation or a dishonest failure to provide information which is required. Fraud Act 2006

However,  him using the address of his friend as his "usual residential address" on that form may be a productive line of attack. 

It would be interesting to hear why Prince Andrew felt the  details entered on that form, including his use of a non-standard name, complied with the Companies Act 2006 requirements.

Companies Act 2006


----------



## dessiato (Dec 27, 2019)

kenny g said:


> In English law anyone can pretty much call themselves whatever they like as long as it is not for a fraudulent purpose. The most obvious Fraud Act 2006 offences arising where there is a dishonest misrepresentation or a dishonest failure to provide information which is required. Fraud Act 2006
> 
> However,  him using the address of his friend as his "usual residential address" on that form may be a productive line of attack.
> 
> ...


I'm sure he wouldn't do anything wrong, after all he is an honourable man, perhaps even too honourable.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Dec 27, 2019)

kenny g said:


> In English law anyone can pretty much call themselves whatever they like as long as it is not for a fraudulent purpose. The most obvious Fraud Act 2006 offences arising where there is a dishonest misrepresentation or a dishonest failure to provide information which is required. Fraud Act 2006



Indeed.



> However,  him using the address of his friend as his "usual residential address" on that form may be a productive line of attack.



I wonder how they got hold of that information, Companies House doesn't make 'usual residential address' public, only a 'correspondence address', which if you don't want your home address published and have no businesses premises, it's usual to use  that of your accountants or solicitors.

Although he used - 27 Old Gloucester Street, London, England, WC1N3AX - the home of British Monomarks, which acts as an accommodation address, well used by pirate radio stations back in the day, as if he didn't want to expose his accountants or solicitors.


----------



## kenny g (Dec 27, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Indeed.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



On the form linked to https://s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/...c40389ba03e4c00b75e8fe4fe24e06f63dae9e1d9944a he listed 21 South Audley Street  as his usual residential address. I agree it is unusual to see that form uploaded on Companies House. It does happen occasionally with older listings. With more recent ones you tend to have electronic filings with truncated dates of birth and no signatures - partly to prevent people doing identify theft.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Dec 27, 2019)

kenny g said:


> On the form linked to https://s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/document-api-images-live.ch.gov.uk/docs/4z-s8ErVIX9Z379NkcGrwvJnyTbZokldsp_dYZKkUGk/application-pdf?X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Content-Sha256=UNSIGNED-PAYLOAD&X-Amz-Credential=ASIAWRGBDBV3MLAWY2ML/20191227/eu-west-2/s3/aws4_request&X-Amz-Date=20191227T145047Z&X-Amz-Expires=60&X-Amz-Security-Token=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&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&X-Amz-Signature=9bfda18e4099b69c903c40389ba03e4c00b75e8fe4fe24e06f63dae9e1d9944a he listed 21 South Audley Street  as his usual residential address. I agree it is unusual to see that form uploaded on Companies House. It does happen occasionally with older listings. With more recent ones you tend to have electronic filings with truncated dates of birth and no signatures - partly to prevent people doing identify theft.



That link doesn't work for me, and doesn't start with the URL of Companies House.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 27, 2019)

dessiato said:


> I'm sure he wouldn't do anything wrong, after all he is an honourable man, perhaps even too honourable.



Perhaps he could clear the air on this issue with an interview with Emily Maitlis?


----------



## Marty1 (Dec 27, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Perhaps he could clear the air on this issue with an interview with Emily Maitlis?



I’m not so sure.

Emily Maitlis: I admire Prince Andrew for doing Newsnight interview


----------



## gosub (Dec 27, 2019)

I think its a no from Pizza Express as well


----------



## kenny g (Dec 27, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> That link doesn't work for me, and doesn't start with the URL of Companies House.



The companies house documents are hosted on amazon cloud servers. Agree it is a long link. If you go to NAPLES GOLD LIMITED - Filing history (free information from Companies House) and access the link to the pdf for "30 Jan 2003 New director appointed" you will get to the document. 

A truncated link is also at : https://bit.ly/2ruloFk


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 27, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> I’m not so sure.
> 
> Emily Maitlis: I admire Prince Andrew for doing Newsnight interview



She’s a cheeky cunt, knows full well he fucked himself right over, but is trying to claim a bit of glory when it is clear that a strategically shaved monkey would have got the same response from the  Dim Son.


----------



## Marty1 (Dec 27, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> She’s a cheeky cunt, knows full well he fucked himself right over, but is trying to claim a bit of glory when it is clear that a strategically shaved monkey would have got the same response from the  Dim Son.



Agreed, plus she’s trying to keep in favour with the twat and the Royals in general.


----------



## kenny g (Dec 27, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> She’s a cheeky cunt, knows full well he fucked himself right over, but is trying to claim a bit of glory when it is clear that a strategically shaved monkey would have got the same response from the  Dim Son.



It is a bit of a weird one because once you have heard all the publicity and then watch the interview he is more obviously bullshitting than on first viewing. Not saying I was convinced by him at first but there is always the possibility someone is telling mostly the truth.


----------



## equationgirl (Dec 27, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Indeed.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Using the address of a solicitors, accountants, lawyers or other business address is fairly common practice, mainly to avoid personal information being added to the Companies House register. In the days of GDPR, and Freedom of Information legislation, it's easier for them to allow the use of a relevant business address.

As for the use of an assumed name and potentially an unrelated residential address, that to my mind is a bit murkier, especially as it may not comply with the Anti Money Laundering regs. I cannot remember if Companies House has any duty under that particular regulation, as I think it mainly applies to financial transactions and financial institutions and companies.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 28, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> She’s a cheeky cunt, knows full well he fucked himself right over, but is trying to claim a bit of glory when it is clear that a strategically shaved monkey would have got the same response from the  Dim Son.


Agreed. My immediate reaction to the interview was that she/the beeb had been pretty cowardly for not going beyond what was already in the public domain and getting into what might have caused more problems for him e.g. 'so, you say you didn't have sex with Giuffre, did you have sex with _anyone _on these visits? What is the biggest age gap between yourself and any sexual partner' etc. I was wrong or at least over the top with that, though as you say he largely fucked himself with his answers rather than any detailed approach from Maitliss.  What I'd add to your post is that she clear didn't believe him at several points in the interview, particularly when she was repeating the line about 'she says you went to tramp nightclub, you danced with her...'. If she really thinks he had sex with a trafficked woman, what the fuck is she saying about _admiring _him.


----------



## bluescreen (Dec 28, 2019)

Wilf said:


> If she really thinks he had sex with a trafficked woman, what the fuck is she saying about _admiring _him.


Um.


----------



## kenny g (Dec 28, 2019)

equationgirl said:


> Using the address of a solicitors, accountants, lawyers or other business address is fairly common practice, mainly to avoid personal information being added to the Companies House register.









When you register a company you provide three addresses.
1. A registered office address which may well be an accountants/ lawyers / company formation agent or even monomarks.
2. An address directors can be contactable at which may well be any of the above.
3. The address at which the director normally resides at. This address has to be what it says it is. i.e. the address the Director normally resides at.

1 and 2 are usually listed on the public register.
3 is listed on formation documents and is not normally disclosable but is available to other public authorities and credit reference agencies. It is classed as "protected information". Companies Act 2006 

Due to groups like SHAC Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty - Wikipedia finding out Directors addresses which have been provided to comply with point 3. specific legislation has been passed which allows the address a director normally resides at to be held on a completely private register if the Director faces specific threats.

There is guidance on these provisions at Restricting the disclosure of your information

What Andrew has done is provide an incorrect address for point 3. Just by a quirk of history/ the company was formed a while back/ we can clearly see he has failed to comply with the requirement to provide a correct address for where he normally resides at.  This is not permitted and is a breach of the 2006 Act (see my above post).



equationgirl said:


> In the days of GDPR, and Freedom of Information legislation, it's easier for them to allow the use of a relevant business address.



The reason they don't enforce correct addresses being provided to comply with requirement 3 is because they are understaffed to a massive degree and have a "light touch" enforcement strategy. Enforcement Strategy at Companies House In effect you can set up a company with dubious details for under £50 and are extremely unlikely to be caught out. It doesn't stop it being an offence though. 



equationgirl said:


> As for the use of an assumed name and potentially an unrelated residential address, that to my mind is a bit murkier, especially as it may not comply with the Anti Money Laundering regs. I cannot remember if Companies House has any duty under that particular regulation, as I think it mainly applies to financial transactions and financial institutions and companies.



It is an offence under section 1112 of the Companies Act 2006 to provide a false statement:



> *1112General false statement offence*
> (1)It is an offence for a person knowingly or recklessly—
> 
> (a)to deliver or cause to be delivered to the registrar, for any purpose of the Companies Acts, a document, or
> ...



Companies Act 2006

There is no reason why a private prosecution couldn't be started if Companies House don't want to pick up the baton.


----------



## dessiato (Dec 28, 2019)

kenny g said:


> When you register a company you provide three addresses.
> 1. A registered office address which may well be an accountants/ lawyers / company formation agent or even monomarks.
> 2. An address directors can be contactable at which may well be any of the above.
> 3. The address at which the director normally resides at. This address has to be what it says it is. i.e. the address the Director normally resides at.
> ...


Any chance of setting up a crowd funding page, I wonder.


----------



## equationgirl (Dec 28, 2019)

kenny g said:


> When you register a company you provide three addresses.
> 1. A registered office address which may well be an accountants/ lawyers / company formation agent or even monomarks.
> 2. An address directors can be contactable at which may well be any of the above.
> 3. The address at which the director normally resides at. This address has to be what it says it is. i.e. the address the Director normally resides at.
> ...


Why the lecture on directors' addresses, and that gif Kenny?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Dec 28, 2019)

kenny g said:


> The companies house documents are hosted on amazon cloud servers. Agree it is a long link. If you go to NAPLES GOLD LIMITED - Filing history (free information from Companies House) and access the link to the pdf for "30 Jan 2003 New director appointed" you will get to the document.
> 
> A truncated link is also at : https://bit.ly/2ruloFk



Thanks for the bit.ly link, that works. 

And, actually not surprising it was published, being that it was drawn up in 2003, prior to the 2006 change in law.

However, it appears from that form, prior to the 2006 Act, you could use a 'service address' instead of your actual 'usual residential address', however the box next to the address should have been ticked, but wasn't.



I think that's likely to be accepted as a minor error TBH, and can't see it ending-up in court, just because someone forgot to tick a box.


----------



## kenny g (Dec 28, 2019)

equationgirl said:


> Why the lecture on directors' addresses, and that gif Kenny?



I think there is a clear potential relevant offence out there. Your earlier post, along with Cupid Stunts seemed to miss my earlier point by conflating two kinds of address requirements. I had already explained the difference in response to cupid and you came back with the same conflation along with trying to drag in GDPR and Anti-Money Laundering (all of which are extremely complicated provisions and not clearly particularly relevant to the matter in hand). I found that frustrating. Hence the gif. 

It wasn't meant to be a lecture but an attempt to share my research into the Company Act 2006 provisions. The 2006 Act is exceptionally long so I was quite pleased with myself to find the relevant offence. If we can use it to put the pressure on Andrew all the better.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Dec 28, 2019)

kenny g said:


> It wasn't meant to be a lecture but an attempt to share my research into the Company Act 2006 provisions. The 2006 Act is exceptionally long so I was quite pleased with myself to find the relevant offence. If we can use it to put the pressure on Andrew all the better.



Good, but sadly wasted work, as the form was completed in 2003 under the Companies Act 1985.


----------



## kenny g (Dec 28, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Thanks for the bit.ly link, that works.
> 
> And, actually not surprising it was published, being that it was drawn up in 2003, prior to the 2006 change in law.
> 
> ...



Thanks, looks like I missed the bleeding obvious in that of course 2003 is prior to the 2006 Act!

Although of course would need to know whether Andrew had a confidentiality order "granted under the provisions of section 723B of the Companies Act 1985" in place. If he didn't then ticking the box wouldn't have been correct either.

 As it was 2003, the Fraud Act 2006 wouldn't have applied either, although I dare say there is some kind of potential dishonesty offence in the myriad of predecessors to the Fraud Act.

People have received quite substantial sentences for failing to tick boxes or for providing incorrect information on things like job or mortgage applications so if we can find an offence under the 1985 Act it may still be a runner.


----------



## kenny g (Dec 28, 2019)

From the 1985 Act



> *10Documents to be sent to registrar.*
> F1(2A)Where any statement delivered under subsection (2) includes an address specified in reliance on paragraph 5 of Schedule 1 there shall be delivered with the statement, a statement in the prescribed form containing particulars of the usual residential address of the director or secretary whose address is so specified.]
> 
> F2under subsection (2)] shall be signed by or on behalf of the subscribers of the memorandum and shall contain a consent signed by each of the persons named in it as a director, as secretary or as one of joint secretaries, to act in the relevant capacity.
> ...






*Companies Act 1985*
Schedule 1 of the 1985 Act goes into the information provisions:



> *Directors*





> *1—Subject as provided below, the statement under section 10(2) shall contain the following particulars with respect to each person named as director—*
> 
> *F2name], any former [F2name], his usual residential address, his nationality, his business occupation (if any), particulars of any other directorships held by him, or which have been held by him [F3and his date of birth];*
> 
> ...




Of particular interest is the specific name provisions:



> *4In paragraphs 1(a) and 3(1)(a) above—*
> 
> *(a)“name” means a person’s Christian name (or other forename) and surname, except that in the case of a peer, or an individual usually known by a title, the title may be stated instead of his Christian name (or other forename) and surname or in addition to either or both of them; and*
> 
> ...


*Companies Act 1985*



For interest , the 1985 Act's confidentially provisions are below. HRH would have had to apply for an order. I don't reckon he did. 
*The Companies (Particulars of Usual Residential Address) (Confidentiality Orders) Regulations 2002*

The Companies (Particulars of Usual Residential Address) (Confidentiality Orders) Regulations 2002

Problem is that I can't find a specific offence that could be used against the Director for the false information under the Companies Act 1985. There is a long list of penalties at
Companies Act 1985 which may hold a clue if someone can be arsed to trawl through. I have drawn a blank for the moment.


----------



## andysays (Dec 28, 2019)

This story isn't going away anytime soon...

Jeffrey Epstein case: FBI 'investigating Ghislaine Maxwell'


> British socialite Ghislaine Maxwell and others are under FBI investigation following the Jeffrey Epstein case, sources have told US and other media. They face investigation over possible crimes linked to the sex trafficking charges laid against the US financier before he killed himself in August.


----------



## extra dry (Dec 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Prince Andrew in a penguin is anticipated after four weeks


4 weeks not 7?


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Dec 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Prince Andrew in a penguin is anticipated after four weeks


What do you mean by "in a penguin"?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 28, 2019)

AnnO'Neemus said:


> What do you mean by "in a penguin"?


Travelling along its alimentary canal


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Dec 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Travelling along its alimentary canal


Eaten by a penguin? I'm still none the wiser.

I think I'm missing some weird film/TV/internet meme cultural reference here. Please will someone fill me in? Thanks


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 28, 2019)

AnnO'Neemus said:


> Eaten by a penguin? I'm still none the wiser.
> 
> I think I'm missing some weird film/TV/internet meme cultural reference here. Please will someone fill me in? Thanks


Many of the former people will be turned into feed pellets for penguins to help them through the harsh antarctic winter should trials prove successful


----------



## equationgirl (Dec 28, 2019)

kenny g said:


> From the 1985 Act
> 
> 
> 
> ...


No-one is going to travel through a piece of largely superseded legislation to do a piece of pointless research. The companies act 1985 is pretty much longer in force with regards to the penalties section.

There are no clues, as you put it, and I very much doubt a crowdfunder will raise enough money for a private prosecution.


----------



## Marty1 (Dec 28, 2019)

andysays said:


> This story isn't going away anytime soon...
> 
> Jeffrey Epstein case: FBI 'investigating Ghislaine Maxwell'



Yeah, I read that article but this bit isn’t promising:



> Reuters said there were no plans to interview Prince Andrew, as he did not fit into that category



(facilitating Epstein’s alleged actions).


----------



## kenny g (Dec 28, 2019)

equationgirl said:


> The companies act 1985 is pretty much longer in force with regards to the penalties section.
> 
> .



Is there  a 'no' missing in the above? As far as I am aware there isn't a time limit for Companies Act 1985 offences. In any case, considering the potential offender it is a worthwhile exercise trying to find the relevant offences and up to now I am not sure there isn't one that could be pursued. I can't see anything negative in that TBH.


----------



## equationgirl (Dec 28, 2019)

kenny g said:


> Is there  a 'no' missing in the above? As far as I am aware there isn't a time limit for Companies Act 1985 offences. In any case, considering the potential offender it is a worthwhile exercise trying to find the relevant offences and up to now I am not sure there isn't one that could be pursued. I can't see anything negative in that TBH.


Yes, there's a no missing.

But if a piece of legislation is superseded it's generally no longer in force, so it no longer has any effect. There a a few sections that haven't been superseded but they are not to do with crimes or penalties.

So I'm unclear why you're waving a bit of legislation that's for the most part dead as if it were some magic bullet or answer.


----------



## kenny g (Dec 28, 2019)

equationgirl said:


> if a piece of legislation is superseded it's generally no longer in force, so it no longer has any effect.



Not sure what you base that on. If the offence took place whilst the statute was in place you can still be prosecuted for the offence under then current statute. It happened, for example,  a lot when the Fraud Act 2006 came in and the myriad of fraud offences were subsequently detected which had occurred prior to the 2006 Act's commencement. 

 Obviously it helps that there are similar provisions in the later Companies Act as it suggests the public interest is still there. One can imagine plenty of old statutes that have been repealed that it would be mad to prosecute for 17 years after the event. I don't think this would be one of them. 



equationgirl said:


> So I'm unclear why you're waving a bit of legislation that's for the most part dead as if it were some magic bullet or answer.



Please...


----------



## equationgirl (Dec 28, 2019)

I give up.


----------



## A380 (Jan 2, 2020)




----------



## teqniq (Jan 5, 2020)

She seems unsurpisingly very well-connected:









						Prince Andrew's pal Ghislaine Maxwell ‘hidden from FBI in Israeli safe house’
					

The British socialite is accused of being Jeffery Epstein’s 'madam' and a spy 'asset' holding information on the world's rich and famous.




					www.dailyrecord.co.uk
				






> Prince Andrew’s friend Ghislaine Maxwell has been accused of being a foreign intelligence “asset” who is currently hiding in an Israeli safe house.
> 
> It’s been claimed the British socialite, who has been accused of being Jeffery Epstein’s “madam”, is being hidden from the FBI as they investigate her friendship with the late paedophile.
> 
> Maxwell, 58, has long been rumoured to have acted with intelligence agencies because she was said to have held information on the world’s rich and famous....


----------



## brogdale (Jan 16, 2020)

Have to admit that I'd missed this:





> Police have come under fire for refusing to release details about Prince Andrew's bodyguards' movements on the night he allegedly had sex with a teenage girl.
> 
> Prince Andrew infamously claimed he was at Pizza Express in Woking, Surrey, on March 10, 2001 - the day he's accused of having sex with Virginia Roberts, now Virginia Giuffre, in London.
> 
> ...



Good look.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 27, 2020)

Source


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2020)

brogdale said:


> Have to admit that I'd missed this:
> 
> View attachment 195932
> 
> ...


if the mirror appeal I'm sure the refusal will be overturned


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 27, 2020)

Perhaps we could hand him over as part of a future trade deal?


----------



## mx wcfc (Jan 27, 2020)

brogdale said:


> View attachment 196856
> 
> Source



Couldn't we swap him for the american women who killed that kid near a US air base?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 27, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> Perhaps we could hand him over as part of a future trade deal?





mx wcfc said:


> Couldn't we swap him for the american women who killed that kid near a US air base?



Or both?


----------



## brogdale (Jan 27, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> if the mirror appeal I'm sure the refusal will be overturned


Even better if the feds went after it as well.


----------



## tim (Jan 27, 2020)

Fez909 said:


> Proper pantomime baddies, the Royal Family, eh?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yes, but in pantomime they don't get away with it.



Poor old Stephen Ward taught us this pair do


----------



## Marty1 (Jan 27, 2020)

Prince Andrew offers “zero cooperation” in Epstein case, prosecutor says	 — The New York Times
					

The British royal said he would help American officials investigating possible sex trafficking by Jeffrey Epstein’s associates, but so far he has ignored their requests.




					apple.news
				






> Federal prosecutors and the F.B.I. have sought to interview Prince Andrew about Jeffrey Epstein, but he has provided “zero cooperation,” the United States attorney in Manhattan said on Monday.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 27, 2020)

He is such a fucking twat he would probably try to wriggle using sovereign immunity or some other such wanky shit


----------



## friedaweed (Jan 27, 2020)

I'll bet he's not losing any sweat over it.


----------



## UrbaneFox (Jan 27, 2020)

Prince Andrew gives 'zero co-operation' over Epstein inquiry, US prosecutor says
					

A US prosecutor says the FBI has contacted the Duke of York's lawyers as part of an investigation.



					www.bbc.co.uk
				




Refusing to co-operate, but he told Emily that he would.


----------



## MickiQ (Jan 27, 2020)

He's clearly not the brighest bulb in the set but I think even he has twigged on he isn't good in interviews


----------



## souljacker (Jan 27, 2020)

teqniq said:


> She seems unsurpisingly very well-connected:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Her dad was VERY well connected in Israel. Half of Mossad turned up at his funeral along with Yitshak Shamir and Chaim Herzog.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 28, 2020)

UrbaneFox said:


> Prince Andrew gives 'zero co-operation' over Epstein inquiry, US prosecutor says
> 
> 
> A US prosecutor says the FBI has contacted the Duke of York's lawyers as part of an investigation.
> ...


He told Emily a bunch of things I think he now regrets


----------



## krtek a houby (Jan 28, 2020)

Maybe the media will show as much passion towards pursuing the royal pervert as much as they did regarding MM...


----------



## kabbes (Jan 28, 2020)




----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 28, 2020)

krtek a houby said:


> Maybe the media will show as much passion towards pursuing the royal pervert as much as they did regarding MM...



He's on most front pages today, so that's a good start, The Scum has a mocked-up FBI Missing Person poster.


----------



## MrSki (Jan 28, 2020)




----------



## teqniq (Jan 28, 2020)

krtek a houby said:


> Maybe the media will show as much passion towards pursuing the royal pervert as much as they did regarding MM...


Now they are in Canada the heat is back on.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 28, 2020)

mx wcfc said:


> Couldn't we swap him for the american women who killed that kid near a US air base?


Not having a go, or anything, but it's notable how many knuckle-dragging nationalist twats are piling in on Daily Mail comments etc. making this very point. They seem quite comfortable defending 'our' paedoprince as long as the US holds onto Sacoolas.
Throughly edifying.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 28, 2020)

brogdale said:


> Not having a go, or anything, but it's notable how many knuckle-dragging nationalist twats are piling in on Daily Mail comments etc. making this very point. They seem quite comfortable defending 'our' paedoprince as long as the US holds onto Sacoolas.
> Throughly edifying.


i never thought i'd see the day when someone accused of sex crimes would be defended by daily mail readers.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 28, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> He's on most front pages today, so that's a good start, The Scum has a mocked-up FBI Missing Person poster.


you'd have thought that the queen would be advising him to sort this out because it may well be the heat goes from him to her.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Jan 28, 2020)

mx wcfc said:


> Couldn't we swap him for the american women who killed that kid near a US air base?


I came to make exactly that point.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Jan 28, 2020)

MickiQ said:


> He's clearly not the brighest bulb in the set but I think even he has twigged on he isn't good in interviews


----------



## brogdale (Jan 28, 2020)

Sasaferrato said:


> I came to make exactly that point.


QED


----------



## Wilf (Jan 28, 2020)

With the nonce's lawyers refusing to answer the New York Prosecutors and buckingham palace simply referring enquiries to the nonce's lawyers, we seem to have reached a unique point (at least postwar). We've got the whole royal family PR effort - and the government I think* - saying absolutely nothing. No flim flam, no holding statements, la la la fingers in ears stuff.  They've _almost _cut him loose, but can't actively give him up - so they can't say anything at all.   The royal family is in the position of the disgraced politician heading from from front gate to car, ignoring reporters and photographers. Good.

* I've seen virtually no news for a fortnight, so johnson may have come out with some anodyne statement, but I've not heard it.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 28, 2020)

Johnson’s not so stupid as to involve himself with this particular shit-show.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 28, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Johnson’s not so stupid as to involve himself with this particular shit-show.


I agree it's a minefield, but in the circumstances I suspect he could gain a few plaudits if he went with 'we stay out of legal matters...  this is a matter for the prince and his legal team blah blah... HOWEVER, we would urge any citizens who have relevant information to help the US authorities. Trafficking is an evil crime etc.'  Maybe even top it off with an aside noting windsor's previous commitments to assist the prosecution.  Possibility it could come back to haunt him in a future extradition case, but for the moment it would be an easy win.


----------



## Marty1 (Jan 28, 2020)

Wilf said:


> With the nonce's lawyers refusing to answer the New York Prosecutors and buckingham palace simply referring enquiries to the nonce's lawyers, we seem to have reached a unique point (at least postwar). We've got the whole royal family PR effort - and the government I think* - saying absolutely nothing. No flim flam, no holding statements, la la la fingers in ears stuff.  They've _almost _cut him loose, but can't actively give him up - so they can't say anything at all.   The royal family is in the position of the disgraced politician heading from from front gate to car, ignoring reporters and photographers. Good.
> 
> * I've seen virtually no news for a fortnight, so johnson may have come out with some anodyne statement, but I've not heard it.



If he got re-interviewed by EM I’d imagine it would go something like:

EM: You previously said you would assist US investigators, yet the FBI have just announced you’ve offered zero assistance.  What’s changed?

PA: Ah, yes, slight problem with that, my lawyers have told me to stfu as I’m guilty as hell.

EM: Fuck you.


----------



## pogofish (Jan 28, 2020)

Wilf said:


> With the nonce's lawyers refusing to answer the New York Prosecutors and buckingham palace simply referring enquiries to the nonce's lawyers, we seem to have reached a unique point (at least postwar). We've got the whole royal family PR effort - and the government I think* - saying absolutely nothing. No flim flam, no holding statements, la la la fingers in ears stuff.  They've _almost _cut him loose, but can't actively give him up - so they can't say anything at all.   The royal family is in the position of the disgraced politician heading from from front gate to car, ignoring reporters and photographers. Good.
> 
> * I've seen virtually no news for a fortnight, so johnson may have come out with some anodyne statement, but I've not heard it.



This is where a prolonged posting to one of the remoter colonial outposts used to be very convenient.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 28, 2020)

pogofish said:


> This is where a prolonged posting to one of the remoter colonial outposts used to be very convenient.


To be honest, after this episode, he's going to get sweet Rockall.


----------



## pogofish (Jan 28, 2020)

Resident military governor/host to US forces on Diego Garcia might seem poetic justice.  He has his wings.


----------



## mx wcfc (Jan 28, 2020)

and, much as would love to see him on a "rendition flight", how come he keeps his HRH and buckets of pay, given he's stood down from the family firm?


----------



## gosub (Jan 28, 2020)

mx wcfc said:


> and, much as would love to see him on a "rendition flight", how come he keeps his HRH and buckets of pay, given he's stood down from the family firm?


The Crown’s Royal Expert Thinks Beatrice and Eugenie May Step In for the Sussexes.  Umm I do feel feel sorry for these two blameless women,but this would be a major misstep


----------



## Combustible (Jan 29, 2020)

UrbaneFox said:


> Prince Andrew gives 'zero co-operation' over Epstein inquiry, US prosecutor says
> 
> 
> A US prosecutor says the FBI has contacted the Duke of York's lawyers as part of an investigation.
> ...


He said that he would co-operate if his lawyers advised him to do so, which is as good as saying that he would not do so, because its something no lawyer would advise.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 29, 2020)

Combustible said:


> He said that he would co-operate if his lawyers advised him to do so, which is as good as saying that he would not do so, because its something no lawyer would advise.


Actually, most of the time they will. Just not when you're rotten to the core, guilty as fuck and a bit too used to people just smiling at your bullshit.


----------



## Combustible (Jan 29, 2020)

Raheem said:


> Actually, most of the time they will. Just not when you're rotten to the core, guilty as fuck and a bit too used to people just smiling at your bullshit.



I am sure he is all of those things, but even if you are not guilty you are generally best saying nothing in the US, since you have a constitutional right to avoid self-incrimination, whereas saying anything will likely just help the authorities build a case against you. Especially since lying to federal investigators (such as from the FBI) is itself a criminal offence, e.g.  Martha Stewart was never actually convicted  for insider trading, but still went to jail for obstructing the investigation and making false statements to Federal agents.


----------



## Marty1 (Jan 29, 2020)

Prince Andrew angered by ‘zero co‑operation’ jibe — The Times and The Sunday Times
					

The Duke of York is “angry and bewildered” by claims that he has not been co-operating with the FBI in its investigation into Jeffrey Epstein, it was reported yesterday. A senior US prosecutor complained on Monday that investigators working on the criminal case into Epstein’s alleged...




					apple.news


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 29, 2020)

^^^ Oh dear, what a shame, never mind.


----------



## andysays (Jan 29, 2020)

mx wcfc said:


> Couldn't we swap him for the american women who killed that kid near a US air base?


Lawyer for the family has actually suggested this,  according to today's Daily Star...


----------



## gosub (Jan 29, 2020)




----------



## MickiQ (Jan 29, 2020)

gosub said:


> The Crown’s Royal Expert Thinks Beatrice and Eugenie May Step In for the Sussexes.  Umm I do feel feel sorry for these two blameless women,but this would be a major misstep


How many ribbon cutters and crowd wavers do we need then?


----------



## dessiato (Jan 29, 2020)

MickiQ said:


> How many ribbon cutters and crowd wavers do we need then?


Fewer than we have


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 29, 2020)

Combustible said:


> I am sure he is all of those things, but even if you are not guilty you are generally best saying nothing in the US, since you have a constitutional right to avoid self-incrimination, whereas saying anything will likely just help the authorities build a case against you. Especially since lying to federal investigators (such as from the FBI) is itself a criminal offence, e.g.  Martha Stewart was never actually convicted  for insider trading, but still went to jail for obstructing the investigation and making false statements to Federal agents.


Yes and no. In the US, while "pleading the fifth" can keep you out of jail, it can also ruin your reputation. He also ruins his reputation by keeping schtum and avoiding setting foot in the US ever again. He's also finished if he cooperates and lies, and if he cooperates and tells the truth. He's finished.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 29, 2020)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yes and no. In the US, while "pleading the fifth" can keep you out of jail, it can also ruin your reputation. He also ruins his reputation by keeping schtum and avoiding setting foot in the US ever again. He's also finished if he cooperates and lies, and if he cooperates and tells the truth. He's finished.


he has already ruined his reputation.

he's already finished.

let's see now how much he damages the rest of the royal family.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jan 29, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> he has already ruined his reputation.
> 
> he's already finished.
> 
> let's see now how much he damages the rest of his lizard family.



ftfy


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 29, 2020)

ruffneck23 said:


> ftfy


they give lizards a bad name


----------



## maomao (Jan 29, 2020)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yes and no. In the US, while "pleading the fifth" can keep you out of jail, it can also ruin your reputation. He also ruins his reputation by keeping schtum and avoiding setting foot in the US ever again. He's also finished if he cooperates and lies, and if he cooperates and tells the truth. He's finished.


Finished as a public figure (and he was never much of one) and condemned to a life of obscene luxury. Doesn't sound much like justice to me.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 29, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> Prince Andrew angered by ‘zero co‑operation’ jibe — The Times and The Sunday Times
> 
> 
> The Duke of York is “angry and bewildered” by claims that he has not been co-operating with the FBI in its investigation into Jeffrey Epstein, it was reported yesterday. A senior US prosecutor complained on Monday that investigators working on the criminal case into Epstein’s alleged...
> ...


If he's angry  perhaps he should get his side across? Maybe a high profile TV interview?


----------



## Steel Icarus (Jan 29, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> they give lizards a bad name


Like Bon Jovi's ex


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 29, 2020)

maomao said:


> Finished as a public figure (and he was never much of one) and condemned to a life of obscene luxury. Doesn't sound much like justice to me.


My money's still on a helicopter crash.


----------



## Johnny Doe (Jan 29, 2020)

littlebabyjesus said:


> My money's still on a helicopter crash.



I wonder if the BBC would some footage of Chaz in their report of it....


----------



## gosub (Jan 29, 2020)

littlebabyjesus said:


> My money's still on a helicopter crash.


Skiiing accident


----------



## two sheds (Jan 29, 2020)

wouldn't eat his porridge


----------



## Duncan2 (Jan 29, 2020)

lightning strike I reckon-double tap.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jan 29, 2020)

Strangle wank.


----------



## mx wcfc (Jan 29, 2020)

SpineyNorman said:


> Strangle wank.


Oh, good call.  That would be a laugh.


----------



## kenny g (Jan 29, 2020)

.


----------



## kenny g (Jan 29, 2020)

pogofish said:


> He has his wings.


Not sure even he can absorb the drip, drip, drip of new developments in this one.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 29, 2020)

mx wcfc said:


> Oh, good call.  That would be a laugh.


Appropriate item for the news on Brexit day:

_'And finally, the 8th in line to the throne was found last night swinging from the toilet door of a Pizza Express, with an orange in his mouth and belt round his neck...'._


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 2, 2020)

Mail has new revelations today that he sent emails to rich pals question Virginia Robert’s sanity. Also a supposed joke about breast cancer that is in such poor taste that they won’t print it, but his rich pals seems quite perturbed by it.


----------



## MickiQ (Feb 2, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Mail has new revelations today that he sent emails to rich pals question Virginia Robert’s sanity. Also a supposed joke about breast cancer that is in such poor taste that they won’t print it, but his rich pals seems quite perturbed by it.


The man certainly has no idea when to stop digging has he?


----------



## dessiato (Feb 2, 2020)

MickiQ said:


> The man certainly has no idea when to stop digging has he?


I went to the website to read the article. I’m not a fan of that newspaper and nor am I a fan of his. This does seem to be others shitting on him though. The comments the article refers to were made in 2011 to someone who claims to be his friend. Admittedly the comments were bad but for a friend to do this 9 years after the email were sent speaks as badly about this friend as it does about Andrew for making the comments in the first place.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 2, 2020)

dessiato said:


> I went to the website to read the article. I’m not a fan of that newspaper and nor am I a fan of his. This does seem to be others shitting on him though. The comments the article refers to were made in 2011 to someone who claims to be his friend. Admittedly the comments were bad but for a friend to do this 9 years after the email were sent speaks as badly about this friend as it does about Andrew for making the comments in the first place.



Andrew has scumbag mates???


----------



## Manter (Feb 2, 2020)

MickiQ said:


> How many ribbon cutters and crowd wavers do we need then?


We could split the country up, like regional sales roles. I reckon 5.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 2, 2020)

Manter said:


> We could split the country up, like regional sales roles. I reckon 5.


7. Bring back the heptarchy


----------



## JimW (Feb 2, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> 7. Bring back the heptarchy


You'd feel a bit short-changed if you'd built a new wing to the hospital but all you got was the Petty King of Elmet.


----------



## Manter (Feb 2, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> 7. Bring back the heptarchy


Do they get base pay and performance related  bonus?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 2, 2020)

Manter said:


> Do they get base pay and performance related  bonus?


Why not?


----------



## dessiato (Feb 2, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Andrew has scumbag mates???


With friends like his he doesn’t need enemies.

of course if he hadn’t done it in the first place...


----------



## Manter (Feb 2, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> Why not?


They could be targeted on tourist numbers....


----------



## clicker (Feb 2, 2020)

If only he had a _real_ friend, to speak out and tell us what a thoroughly good egg Andy is and how we've all got it terribly wrong. 
Oh well...


----------



## 1927 (Feb 2, 2020)

One thing that i'm wary of, even tho i dont trust Andrew at all, if if he was in Tramps with Virginia Roberts surely by now the press would have found someone who was there and saw them. im sure you'd remember HRH being in a nightclub! No?


----------



## kabbes (Feb 3, 2020)

Do you owe your friend loyalty for life no matter how much of a child-abusing, sex-trafficking prick they turn out to be?


----------



## dessiato (Feb 3, 2020)

kabbes said:


> Do you owe your friend loyalty for life no matter how much of a child-abusing, sex-trafficking prick they turn out to be?


No you don’t. But dragging up some bad taste joke from 9 years ago is not the done thing. I’m sure if people were to dig back far enough we could each of us be found to have  told a bad joke, or said something that’s dodgy.

As for the other stuff Andrew has done, that’s his own stupidity and he deserves what he gets for that. Without question.


----------



## xenon (Feb 3, 2020)

dessiato said:


> No you don’t. But dragging up some bad taste joke from 9 years ago is not the done thing. I’m sure if people were to dig back far enough we could each of us be found to have  told a bad joke, or said something that’s dodgy.
> 
> As for the other stuff Andrew has done, that’s his own stupidity and he deserves what he gets for that. Without question.


stupidity, not the word I would use.
his wit or lack of is really ancillary to his arrogance, venal self interest and misogyny.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 3, 2020)

dessiato said:


> I went to the website to read the article. I’m not a fan of that newspaper and nor am I a fan of his. This does seem to be others shitting on him though. The comments the article refers to were made in 2011 to someone who claims to be his friend. Admittedly the comments were bad but for a friend to do this 9 years after the email were sent speaks as badly about this friend as it does about Andrew for making the comments in the first place.


Thanks for that.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 3, 2020)

1927 said:


> One thing that i'm wary of, even tho i dont trust Andrew at all, if if he was in Tramps with Virginia Roberts surely by now the press would have found someone who was there and saw them. im sure you'd remember HRH being in a nightclub! No?




Two women who were in Tramp on the night have already given affidavits to the US lawyers that they saw Andrew there with Virginia Roberts on that night.


----------



## TopCat (Feb 3, 2020)

1927 said:


> One thing that i'm wary of, even tho i dont trust Andrew at all, if if he was in Tramps with Virginia Roberts surely by now the press would have found someone who was there and saw them. im sure you'd remember HRH being in a nightclub! No?


Its was never newsworthy or so they claim. He got a free pass.


----------



## TopCat (Feb 3, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> he has already ruined his reputation.
> 
> he's already finished.
> 
> let's see now how much he damages the rest of the royal family.


Events are thinning them out at an increasing rate. Royal entropy.


----------



## Part 2 (Feb 5, 2020)

Maybe that swap for Sacoolas is on the cards.









						Epstein accusers and Harry Dunn's family plea for UK-US cooperation
					

Teenager’s family and attorney Lisa Bloom urge Prince Andrew and Anne Sacoolas to assist law enforcement




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Feb 6, 2020)

The government is instructing councils to fly the union flag on 19 February for his 60th birthday.

Liverpool have said no


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 6, 2020)

Puddy_Tat said:


> The government is instructing councils to fly the union flag on 19 February for his 60th birthday.
> 
> Liverpool have said no


Is this deliberately stupid?  They're keeping him in the spotlight.


----------



## Buddy Bradley (Feb 7, 2020)

Weirdly, the BBC have taken to referring to Epstein as the "disgraced sex-offender Jeffrey Epstein". Is it so we don't confuse him with the fine, upstanding sex-offender Jeffrey Epstein?


----------



## andysays (Feb 7, 2020)

There's another Andrew story on the BBC website today, apparently his promotion to Admiral in the RN has been deferred.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 7, 2020)

andysays said:


> There's another Andrew story on the BBC website today, apparently his promotion to Admiral in the RN has been deferred.



No rum, sodomy and lash for Andy.


----------



## gosub (Feb 7, 2020)

andysays said:


> There's another Andrew story on the BBC website today, apparently his promotion to Admiral in the RN has been deferred.


Read that, he wants it deferred  UNTIL he resumes royal duties.  Oh and Westminster Abbey will be bell ringing on 19th Feb just don't ask for whom the bell tolls.


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Feb 7, 2020)

gosub said:


> Read that, he wants it deferred  UNTIL he resumes royal duties.  Oh and Westminster Abbey will be bell ringing on 19th Feb just don't ask for whom the bell tolls.


UNTIL??!? Fucking hell he really is absolutey clueless isn't it?


----------



## gosub (Feb 7, 2020)

Mrs Miggins said:


> UNTIL??!? Fucking hell he really absolutey clueless isn't it?


If Mitt Romney is a secret Democrat asset then the Duke of York is definitely striving for a eepublic


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 7, 2020)

Buddy Bradley said:


> Weirdly, the BBC have taken to referring to Epstein as the "disgraced sex-offender Jeffrey Epstein". Is it so we don't confuse him with the fine, upstanding sex-offender Jeffrey Epstein?



For quite a while even after his death he was still 'the financier Jeffrey Epstein'. I hope I still get referred to by my job title when I die in prison.


----------



## xenon (Feb 7, 2020)

Puddy_Tat said:


> The government is instructing councils to fly the union flag on 19 February for his 60th birthday.
> 
> Liverpool have said no



Now back pedalled on that one. 








						Councils do not have to fly Union flag to mark Prince Andrew's birthday Government says
					

Decision follows a revolt over plans to fly the flag despite controversy surrounding the Duke over his friendship with Jeffrey Epstein




					www.telegraph.co.uk
				




Fucking stupid toy town bullshit queens and royals retarded(in the proper sense of the word)  country this is. Princely pedo friend still getting spessal medals off his mummy.


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Feb 7, 2020)

I didn't even know anybody HAD to fly a flag for any royal birthday. What absolute bullshit that is.


----------



## JimW (Feb 7, 2020)

Do they specify the Union flag? You could fly a New Model Army battle standard.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 7, 2020)

JimW said:


> Do they specify the Union flag? You could fly a New Model Army battle standard.




P.I.E. flag (they did have a logo)


----------



## Wilf (Feb 7, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> P.I.E. flag (they did have a logo)


They've also got a royal patron now.


----------



## weltweit (Feb 13, 2020)

Barclays boss Jes Staley 'deeply regrets' sex offender link
					

Financial watchdogs are investigating Jes Staley's links with disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein.



					www.bbc.co.uk
				






> Barclays boss Jes Staley said he "deeply regrets" his connection with sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
> 
> His comments come after Barclays revealed that UK regulators are investigating the chief executive's links with the disgraced financier.
> 
> ...



Epstein was well connected, it wasn't just Andrew and Trump ..


----------



## Marty1 (Feb 13, 2020)

weltweit said:


> Barclays boss Jes Staley 'deeply regrets' sex offender link
> 
> 
> Financial watchdogs are investigating Jes Staley's links with disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein.
> ...



Has there been any reports of how Epstein made his billions?


----------



## weltweit (Feb 13, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> Has there been any reports of how Epstein made his billions?


I think it was financial services, might have been hedge funds.


----------



## CNT36 (Feb 13, 2020)

weltweit said:


> I think it was financial services, might have been hedge funds.


It just gets worse.


----------



## MickiQ (Feb 13, 2020)

Someone is going to have to come up with a really imaginative way for all these people to have the same gruesome but completely accidental death


----------



## elbows (Feb 13, 2020)

MickiQ said:


> Someone is going to have to come up with a really imaginative way for all these people to have the same gruesome but completely accidental death



I dont think you neessarily need to kill all or even many in order to achieve similar objectives. And theres always one or two who can be relied on to actually fall onto their own sword, so the required mood can often be set without actually having to bump someone off. If there are exceptions, we will be very lucky to see real proof, and little imagination is required to come up with such theories entirely independently of the actual reality and available facts.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Feb 15, 2020)

Another mate with a similar MO, funny that









						Prince Andrew stayed with billionaire accused of raping 10 women - some only 14
					

The scandal comes as another embarrassment for Buckingham Palace as Prince Andrew is linked to Peter Nygard - months after the Duke of York faced questions over his friendship with Jeffrey Epstein




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## brogdale (Feb 15, 2020)

Proper Tidy said:


> Another mate with a similar MO, funny that
> 
> 
> 
> ...


_Too honourable_


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 15, 2020)

Proper Tidy said:


> Another mate with a similar MO, funny that
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Fucking hell. That article calls the alleged rape victims, some of whom were under age, “former ‘girlfriends’”, in a passage describing a campaign of intimidation against them.  That’s not an acceptable synonym.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Feb 15, 2020)

danny la rouge said:


> Fucking hell. That article calls the alleged rape victims, some of whom were under age, “former ‘girlfriends’”, in a passage describing a campaign of intimidation against them.  That’s not an acceptable synonym.



Weird piece isn't it, like the fact it refers to one 14 yo and three 15 yo but never once calls him a paedophile, alleged or otherwise


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 15, 2020)

Proper Tidy said:


> Weird piece isn't it, like the fact it refers to one 14 yo and three 15 yo but never once calls him a paedophile, alleged or otherwise


It is weird. Thought may be age of consent in Bahamas 14 but no, it's 16. Puzzling


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 15, 2020)

“See her over there?”
“The 14-year-old girl?”
“Yes. She’s an old girlfriend of mine”.
“How did you meet?”
“When I had her drugged with rohipnol”.
“That’s so sweet. Are you still seeing her?”
“Well, yes, but she doesn’t see me”.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 15, 2020)

For avoidance of doubt: that’s pointing out the vile, atrocious absurdity of the phrase “former ‘girlfriends’” in the circumstances. It isn’t levity.


----------



## two sheds (Feb 15, 2020)

Also interesting from that article: "There are no criminal charges associated with any of the allegations."

That's ok then.


----------



## keybored (Feb 15, 2020)

danny la rouge said:


> Fucking hell. That article calls the alleged rape victims, some of whom were under age, “former ‘girlfriends’”, in a passage describing a campaign of intimidation against them.  That’s not an acceptable synonym.


To be fair the article seems to be quoting the lawsuit. Still weird.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 15, 2020)

keybored said:


> To be fair the article seems to be quoting the lawsuit. Still weird.


I noticed the quote marks. But, as you say, still.


----------



## keybored (Feb 15, 2020)

Proper Tidy said:


> Another mate with a similar MO, funny that


Maybe he befriends such men in the hope that some of that _honour _might rub off on them? Doesn't seem to work...


> In 1978, Nygård's takeover of a sportswear designer's business in New York City led to a 12-year legal battle in New York federal court.
> 
> In 1980, the Free Press wrote that Nygård was charged with the rape of an 18-year-old girl by Winnipeg authorities. Later those charges were dropped. Nygård settled sexual harassment complaints by three former employees in Manitoba in the late 1990s.
> 
> ...


----------



## Proper Tidy (Feb 15, 2020)

keybored said:


> Maybe he befriends such men in the hope that some of that _honour _might rub off on them? Doesn't seem to work...



Christ


----------



## BCBlues (Feb 16, 2020)

Sorting my old records out yesterday and came across this shit. I seriously thought of sending it to Andrew and saying here, this is your scene but I knew it wouldn't get to him.

So, what the bloody hell do I do with it?


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 16, 2020)

BCBlues said:


> View attachment 198786
> 
> Sorting my old records out yesterday and came across this shit. I seriously thought of sending it to Andrew and saying here, this is your scene but I knew it wouldn't get to him.
> 
> So, what the bloody hell do I do with it?


Do you have a record player or know someone who does, maybe they'd want it.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Feb 16, 2020)

BCBlues said:


> View attachment 198786
> 
> Sorting my old records out yesterday and came across this shit. I seriously thought of sending it to Andrew and saying here, this is your scene but I knew it wouldn't get to him.
> 
> So, what the bloody hell do I do with it?



Bin it.


----------



## BCBlues (Feb 16, 2020)

DexterTCN said:


> Do you have a record player or know someone who does, maybe they'd want it.



I've got one but I ain't playing no perv tunes on it ta. That's why I thought andy might like it. Remember him of some of his lost mates.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Feb 16, 2020)

DexterTCN said:


> Do you have a record player or know someone who does, maybe they'd want it.


----------



## two sheds (Feb 16, 2020)

crookedbrains.net


----------



## BCBlues (Feb 16, 2020)

two sheds said:


> crookedbrains.net



Some good ideas in there. How about a spitoon


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 16, 2020)

BCBlues said:


> I've got one but I ain't playing no perv tunes on it ta. That's why I thought andy might like it. Remember him of some of his lost mates.


I doubt he's wanting for mates.

I doubt they worry this will even touch them.

I would suggest, only partly flippantly, using a Gary Glitter song as the anthem to push this issue.  No reason not to use a mirror as one of the tools.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Feb 16, 2020)

When worked for a pirate radio station, unwanted singles were moulded in front of the gas fire, and with a bit of insulation tape over the hole in the middle, they became ashtrays.


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 16, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> When worked for a pirate radio station, unwanted singles were moulded in front of the gas fire, and with a bit of insulation tape over the hole in the middle, they became ashtrays.


He'd still have it.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Feb 19, 2020)

Lol!









						Prince Andrew celebrating 60th birthday with 'quiet one' at Woking Pizza Express
					

Prince Andrew is today celebrating his 60th birthday with a quiet family celebration and a Sloppy Guiseppe.




					newsthump.com


----------



## MrSki (Feb 19, 2020)




----------



## elbows (Feb 21, 2020)

School bus stunt urges Prince Andrew to talk to FBI about Jeffrey Epstein
					

US lawyer Gloria Allred arranged for bus to be driven past Buckingham Palace with message for prince




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## hash tag (Feb 21, 2020)

Yep, saw that driving along the embankment about 2 hours ago


----------



## TopCat (Feb 21, 2020)

weltweit said:


> I think it was financial services, might have been hedge funds.


No transparency regarding this. People who met him and knew about these things say he could not add up so questions remain.


----------



## TopCat (Feb 21, 2020)

elbows said:


> View attachment 199352
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Great that he is getting pressured.


----------



## Marty1 (Feb 26, 2020)

Some fashion millionaire linked to PA has had his Manhattan offices raided by US officials on suspicion of sex trafficking.









						Peter Nygard: FBI raids fashion mogul HQ in sex trafficking probe
					

The FBI raid comes as Nygard faces lawsuit accusing him of sex abuse against ten women and girls.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## TopCat (Feb 26, 2020)

All it needs is for one peado to be the first to flip and they are all doomed. It will be a suicide comp.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 9, 2020)

From today's Guardian:





> Prince Andrew has “completely shut the door” on cooperating with US investigators in the Jeffrey Epstein case and they are now “considering” further options, a New York prosecutor said on Monday.
> 
> Speaking to reporters on Monday, the Manhattan US attorney Geoffrey Berman said: “Contrary to Prince Andrew’s very public offer to cooperate with our investigation into Epstein’s co-conspirators, an offer that was conveyed via press release, Prince Andrew has now completely shut the door on voluntary cooperation and *our office is considering its options.*”


----------



## ruffneck23 (Mar 9, 2020)

nothing shows innocence like running away...


----------



## TopCat (Mar 9, 2020)

brogdale said:


> From today's Guardian:
> 
> View attachment 201152


Rumours of a Grand Jury sealed indictment abound.


----------



## dylanredefined (Mar 10, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> i never thought i'd see the day when someone accused of sex crimes would be defended by daily mail readers.


  Hypocrisy is something the mail loves to point out.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Mar 10, 2020)

Tbf it's better for everybody to think you are a nonce than for your own testimony to demonstrate you're a nonce or get you in the shit for perjury so I'd say his legal team have probably done their jobs well


----------



## Wilf (Mar 10, 2020)

_'My client doesn't wish to comment on the other nonces on the grounds he might incriminate himself of nonceing. He also doesn't wish to talk about taking paedo flights to Paedo Island with all the other nonces. He is though happy to help the American authorities in every other respect. The sweaty bastard'_.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Mar 10, 2020)

Wilf said:


> _'My client doesn't wish to comment on the other nonces on the grounds he might incriminate himself of nonceing. He also doesn't wish to talk about taking paedo flights to Paedo Island with all the other nonces. He is though happy to help the American authorities in every other respect. The sweaty bastard'_.



My client, now commonly known as the paedo prince, has no comment to make


----------



## TopCat (Mar 10, 2020)

Wilf said:


> _'My client doesn't wish to comment on the other nonces on the grounds he might incriminate himself of nonceing. He also doesn't wish to talk about taking paedo flights to Paedo Island with all the other nonces. He is though happy to help the American authorities in every other respect. The sweaty bastard'_.


This approach is all very well but he wont be able to leave the UK for fear of arrest and extradition. Given how much the rapist nonce likes to travel this will impact upon him.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 10, 2020)

staff at the ecuadorian embassy are on alert, ready to repel paedo princes trying to seek asylum


----------



## teqniq (Mar 10, 2020)

Calling in the heavy mob.









						Prince Andrew hires Pinochet lawyer as FBI pursues probe into royal's links with paedophile Epstein
					

The Duke of York has hired Britain's most respected extradition lawyer as the FBI investigates his friendship with convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.




					www.independent.ie


----------



## Wilf (Mar 10, 2020)

teqniq said:


> Calling in the heavy mob.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Doesn't he risk making himself look bad by doing this?


----------



## brogdale (Mar 10, 2020)

Wilf said:


> Doesn't he risk making himself look bad by doing this?


It's a stupid headline; these lawyer psychopaths will work for anyone with the mega-bucks.
It would be better if it said that the Paedo-Prince was using our £ to save himself form being banged up on the nonce wing.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 10, 2020)

Wilf said:


> Doesn't he risk making himself look bad by doing this?


That birdy's flown. Not going to jail is the prime objective now. Even thicky mcthick must now know that nobody believes him.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Mar 10, 2020)

Wilf said:


> Doesn't he risk making himself look bad by doing this?



Too late, he's already made himself look bad.


----------



## Rosemary Jest (Mar 10, 2020)

I, for one, believe he is entirely innocent.

The man can't sweat, and doesn't know where the bar is in Tramp. He can't recall ever meeting anyone, and was in Pizza Express in Woking when the alleged incident occurred.

Won't you lot just give him a break?


----------



## fishfinger (Mar 10, 2020)

Rosemary Jest said:


> I, for one, believe he is entirely innocent.
> 
> The man can't sweat...


Nonce Andrew, seen earlier


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 11, 2020)

Looks like Beatrice’s wedding might be orf too; marrying someone Italian prick, Italy locked down. Bally bad luck to befall such a multi-talentless bunch o’ cunts.


----------



## LiamO (Mar 11, 2020)

Prince Andrew Self-Isolates From Epstein Investigation
					

A SPECIAL ward has been set up in the east wing of Buckingham Palace for Prince Andrew where he will shut himself away from any further questioning about his relationship with billionaire paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, …




					waterfordwhispersnews.com


----------



## gosub (Mar 15, 2020)




----------



## magneze (Mar 15, 2020)

He's fucked if he gets a fever though, what with being unable to sweat.


----------



## brogdale (May 3, 2020)

I know that Trump retweets any old shite, but this did catch my attention...


----------



## gosub (May 10, 2020)

Prince Andrew charity's 355k payments to former private secretary. Keeping tabs on where the Duke was and when is obviously a very rewarding thing to do


----------



## Marty1 (May 12, 2020)

brogdale said:


> I know that Trump retweets any old shite, but this did catch my attention...
> 
> View attachment 210531



Yep, the ‘Jeffrey Epstein didn’t kill himself’ phrase/meme is now mainstream and no longer regarded as one for the conspiracy theorists.

Most logical thinking people come to the credible assumption based on the circumstances that it’s likely that Epstein was killed before he could name names.

Well how about that.


----------



## Orang Utan (May 12, 2020)

It’s also equally likely that he killed himself to avoid a trial and jail time
ETA: actually far more likely


----------



## fishfinger (May 12, 2020)

Orang Utan said:


> It’s also equally likely that he killed himself to avoid a trial and jail time
> ETA: actually far more likely


Especially as he had changed his will 2 days before his suicide. Making it much harder for his victims to make claims against his estate.

Jeffrey Epstein signed a will just two days before his death


----------



## editor (May 12, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> Yep, the ‘Jeffrey Epstein didn’t kill himself’ phrase/meme is now mainstream and no longer regarded as one for the conspiracy theorists.
> 
> Most logical thinking people come to the credible assumption based on the circumstances that it’s likely that Epstein was killed before he could name names.
> 
> Well how about that.


You really don't speak on behalf of 'most logical thinking people .'


----------



## TopCat (May 12, 2020)

editor said:


> You really don't speak on behalf of 'most logical thinking people .'


no one does. do you think he killed himself?


----------



## editor (May 12, 2020)

TopCat said:


> no one does. do you think he killed himself?


I don't know and have got bigger things to worry about.


----------



## Idris2002 (May 12, 2020)

The thing about the Epstein case is that everything that is confirmed and in the public domain is already damning enough: we know he ran an organized rape ring; we know that one purpose of that ring was to collect compromising information on powerful people; we know that he was working for at least one western intelligence agency, and that this helped him evade serious punishment the first time he came to the attention of the authorities.

The "Epstein didn't kill himself stuff" is just icing on the cake. I happen to think he didn't kill himself, but the key point is that he wasn't one isolated pervert, but he was part of a bigger machine.


----------



## William of Walworth (May 13, 2020)

Idris2002 said:


> The thing about the Epstein case is that everything that is confirmed and in the public domain is already damning enough: we know he ran an organized rape ring; we know that one purpose of that ring was to collect compromising information on powerful people; we know that he was working for at least one western intelligence agency, and that this helped him evade serious punishment the first time he came to the attention of the authorities.
> 
> The "Epstein didn't kill himself stuff" is just icing on the cake. *I happen to think he didn't kill himself*, but the key point is that he wasn't one isolated pervert, but he was part of a bigger machine.



Bolded bit : Is not the idea that he didn't kill himself near-exclusively the province of conspiracy theorists, and therefore near-automatically bollocks?


----------



## Idris2002 (May 13, 2020)

William of Walworth - the province of the conspiraloons is inhabited by people who explain everything as being the result of a Hidden Hand at work. I don't think that's the case, in this case or any other. The vital point about this case is what it reveals about the cliques of the world's powerbrokers really operate. No hidden hands required, just a lot of back scratching bolstered by (where necessary) kompromat.

With regard to Epstein's death, it's the fact the jail he was in hadn't lost a prisoner to suicide in decades, and that his hyoid bone was broken, something I had previously only heard of in the case of an American Spartacist woman who was murdered in Moscow in the early 1990s. That's what makes me think he didn't check out on a solo run . . .  not because I have been turned by the conspiraloons and now see the scaly claws of the lizard people in all human events.


----------



## William of Walworth (May 13, 2020)

Idris2002 Taking your points, you clearly know a lot more than I do. Thanks.

Still, conspiro-sceptics are naturally going to be cautious about it, given how loons have so eagerly latched on to this one. 

That must be very annoying to any serious/sane people (like you) who have genuine suspicions!


----------



## brogdale (Jun 1, 2020)

ooooff...


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 1, 2020)

brogdale said:


> ooooff...
> 
> View attachment 215698


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 1, 2020)

Seems Randy Andy owes six mill on his pad in Verbier and is being sued for it. Now mummy has stepped in and said she'll pay it to keep him from getting in to trouble. He's sixty years old ffs.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jun 1, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Seems Randy Andy owes six mill on his pad in Verbier and is being sued for it. Now mummy has stepped in and said she'll pay it to keep him from getting in to trouble. He's sixty years old ffs.


So, in essence, the taxpayer has bought him this nice little skiing chalet.







What next, 4 poster beds and Michelin star chefs on the beast wing?


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 1, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Seems Randy Andy owes six mill on his pad in Verbier and is being sued for it. Now mummy has stepped in and said she'll pay it to keep him from getting in to trouble. He's sixty years old ffs.


Queen (via spokesman) denying stepping in to help. The Yorks claim that any debt they owe, almost £7m, will be cleared when they sell the chalet.

Must be nice to get half your mortgage value deferred for five years, I'm pretty sure my bank would tell me to get to fuck if I requested similar terms.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 1, 2020)

equationgirl said:


> Queen (via spokesman) denying stepping in to help. The Yorks claim that any debt they owe, almost £7m, will be cleared when they sell the chalet.
> 
> Must be nice to get half your mortgage value deferred for five years, I'm pretty sure my bank would tell me to get to fuck if I requested similar terms.




Yeah, he's now saying mummy won't be paying, and we can take his word on this, cos honourable and tha...


----------



## dessiato (Jun 1, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Yeah, he's now saying mummy won't be paying, and we can take his word on this, cos honourable and tha...


That’s right, no sweat...


----------



## brogdale (Jun 7, 2020)

Hmmm


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 7, 2020)

Bet he's sweating now


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jun 7, 2020)

Orang Utan said:


> Bet he's sweating now


Or not. Allegedly and in quotes. ie even if true, from a deniable source, and will be denied by all parties, no doubt.


----------



## Tankus (Jun 7, 2020)

Can't we do an extradition swop.? .. Andy.... For that woman who claimed diplomatic immunity and did a runner back to the States after killing that lad in an RTA?

Seems fair


----------



## NoXion (Jun 7, 2020)

William of Walworth said:


> Bolded bit : Is not the idea that he didn't kill himself near-exclusively the province of conspiracy theorists, and therefore near-automatically bollocks?



Not all conspiracy theories are equal. Sometimes conspiracies really do happen.

The problem with the conspiracies that the Batshit Brigade come up with (such as the conspiracy to conceal the true shape of the Earth) is that they would _have_ to involve thousands, if not actually hundreds of thousands of people. All of them would have to keep absolutely silent for decades on end, or would involve passing it down over the centuries. Yet we're supposed to believe that not a single one of these conspirators has ever given a deathbed confession, been tempted to spill the beans by large sums of money, or simply blabbed for the fame of being the first to blow the lid on the whole operation? Not even remotely plausible. And that's without even going into the lizardy shit.

But the idea that a handful of very powerful people would kill one man to stop him spilling the beans in court? How is that implausible?

I don't think Epstein killed himself either, but I will also admit that this belief is not based on any direct evidence. Maybe the truth will come out some years hence, and I will either have to revise my beliefs, or I will get the rare pleasure of being able to say "see, I told you so!". But until then, it's just my opinion.


----------



## xenon (Jun 7, 2020)

Is he dead yet?


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 7, 2020)

#PrinceAndrewWontKillHimself


----------



## maomao (Jun 8, 2020)

Apparentky the US prosecutors are just making a fuss for publicity (wtaf?) and Andrew's offered to help 'at least' three times. So why hasn't he been to spill the beans yet?

I don't think we should hand him over personally. Just get the paedo shitbag shot.









						Prince Andrew 'offered to help Jeffrey Epstein prosecutors'
					

Prince Andrew's lawyers have clashed with US prosecutors over the duke's co-operation with the inquiry.



					www.bbc.com


----------



## MickiQ (Jun 8, 2020)

I is skeptical, If he genuine is completely innocent and has never met this girl (something which NO-ONE believes) then clearing his name would be his absolute top priority.
Given his spectacular car crash of an interview, I imagine his lawyers have realised that letting an actual cop interview him rather than a fairly deferential journalist would result in him being in handcuffs before the interview was through.
If they offered help then I guess there have been attempts to impose loads of pre-conditions on what the cops are allowed to ask him and the cops aren't having any.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 8, 2020)

I dont think andy boy will be popping over to NYC for a weekend shopping once the all clear is given.  

The Royal roman polanski


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 8, 2020)

He is a qualified pilot, so as a flight risk they should stick him in Belmash with Assange until this whole beastly business is resolved.


----------



## maomao (Jun 8, 2020)

MickiQ said:


> I is skeptical, If he genuine is completely innocent and has never met this girl (something which NO-ONE believes) then clearing his name would be his absolute top priority.
> Given his spectacular car crash of an interview, I imagine his lawyers have realised that letting an actual cop interview him rather than a fairly deferential journalist would result in him being in handcuffs before the interview was through.
> If they offered help then I guess there have been attempts to impose loads of pre-conditions on what the cops are allowed to ask him and the cops aren't having any.


This is quite possibly it. He's said he'll pop over for a cuppa and a chat if they put him up somewhere nice and they want a grand jury.

 Grand juries are often televised aren't they? That would be wonderful.


----------



## stavros (Jun 8, 2020)

Could the government do a deal, whereby they get Andy in return for that woman who killed that teenager last year by driving on the wrong side of the road? The first stage of the transatlantic trade deal.


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 9, 2020)

The US prosecutor is claiming Prince Andrew has falsely portrayed himself as willing to co-operate, according to an article on the BBC website.

I'm sure this revelation comes as a great shock to all on this thread.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 9, 2020)

Pesky colonial said:
			
		

> Mr Berman then issued a statement, deepening the row. He said: "Today, Prince Andrew yet again sought to falsely portray himself to the public as eager and willing to co-operate with an ongoing federal criminal investigation into sex trafficking and related offences committed by Jeffrey Epstein and his associates."
> He said the duke "has not given an interview to federal authorities, has repeatedly declined our request to schedule such an interview, and nearly four months ago informed us unequivocally - through the very same counsel who issued today's release - that he would not come in for such an interview".
> "If Prince Andrew is, in fact, serious about co-operating with the ongoing federal investigation, our doors remain open, and we await word of when we should expect him."



Surely just a misunderstanding that can be resolved with a civilised chat at Wagamama in Slough?


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 9, 2020)

Tankus said:


> Can't we do an extradition swop.? .. Andy.... For that woman who claimed diplomatic immunity and did a runner back to the States after killing that lad in an RTA?
> 
> Seems fair


You say that with tongue in cheek but it’s absolutely reasonable. Unless Anne Sacoolas comes to the U.K. to answer questions about the death of Harry Dunn, the US can go fuck themselves over Andy, as far as I’m concerned.


----------



## 19sixtysix (Jun 9, 2020)

The US prossecutors obviously don't have enough for a charge and hence an extradition request. They can only send some cops over to ask questions at which any lawyer worth their salt will advise their client to say bugger all. Not sure this is going anywhere.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 9, 2020)

According to the Fail Randy Andy is not a target of the DoJ, but they do want to interview him, whereas he has offered to give them a written statement or at a push, answer questions via email.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jun 9, 2020)

19sixtysix said:


> The US prossecutors obviously don't have enough for a charge and hence an extradition request. They can only send some cops over to ask questions at which any lawyer worth their salt will advise their client to say bugger all. Not sure this is going anywhere.


I don't think that's obvious tbh. A formal request to the UK to extradict a senior royal? There will be people high up in the US who will block that idea, however strong the case they think they have.


----------



## MickiQ (Jun 9, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> You say that with tongue in cheek but it’s absolutely reasonable. Unless Anne Sacoolas comes to the U.K. to answer questions about the death of Harry Dunn, the US can go fuck themselves over Andy, as far as I’m concerned.


Anne Sacoolas and He Who Cannot Sweat are 2 totally separate cases and any attempt to connect them together are doomed to failure, She won't come back willingly and no-one other than a US judge can make her. Being a father myself, I have sympathy for Harry Dunn's Dad but the man is flogging a horse that isn't so much dead as never existed in the first place.
As for He Who Cannot Sweat whilst you can almost see the words "Creepy Middle Aged Nonce" hovering over his head, there does not appear to be any solid evidence of him committing any actual extraditable crimes. This is more about protecting the reputation of the Royal Family and after the last attempt no-one thinks he is up to it.
I still think if he had tried to brazen it out and just said "Yeah I slept with this girl but she told me she was 18 and I believed her" then it would have gone a lot less hard on him than his pathetic attempt to convince the public that his word as a member of the Royal Family was beyond reproach and should be believed without question.


----------



## chandlerp (Jun 9, 2020)

maomao said:


> This is quite possibly it. He's said he'll pop over for a cuppa and a chat if they put him up somewhere nice and they want a grand jury.
> 
> Grand juries are often televised aren't they? That would be wonderful.



Pretty sure Grand Juries are conducted in private as they are basically hearing to decide whether the evidence is good enough for an indictment.


----------



## maomao (Jun 9, 2020)

chandlerp said:


> Pretty sure Grand Juries are conducted in private as they are basically hearing to decide whether the evidence is good enough for an indictment.


Yeah, I looked it up since. Can't even take a lawyer in. I've probably seen dramatised ones and remembered it wrong.


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 9, 2020)

MickiQ said:


> Anne Sacoolas and He Who Cannot Sweat are 2 totally separate cases and any attempt to connect them together are doomed to failure, She won't come back willingly and no-one other than a US judge can make her. Being a father myself, I have sympathy for Harry Dunn's Dad but the man is flogging a horse that isn't so much dead as never existed in the first place.
> As for He Who Cannot Sweat whilst you can almost see the words "Creepy Middle Aged Nonce" hovering over his head, there does not appear to be any solid evidence of him committing any actual extraditable crimes. This is more about protecting the reputation of the Royal Family and after the last attempt no-one thinks he is up to it.
> I still think if he had tried to brazen it out and just said "Yeah I slept with this girl but she told me she was 18 and I believed her" then it would have gone a lot less hard on him than his pathetic attempt to convince the public that his word as a member of the Royal Family was beyond reproach and should be believed without question.


You miss my point. Clearly they’re separate issues but both are examples of international legal situations requiring cooperation between the U.K. and US.

In lieu of a British spook’s wife killing an American kid by wreckless driving, the FO faking her some diplomatic immunity, spiriting her out of the country then refusing US extradition requests; I’ll take Andrew flipping them the bird over this.

Fuck ‘em.


----------



## MickiQ (Jun 9, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> You miss my point. Clearly they’re separate issues but both are examples of international legal situations requiring cooperation between the U.K. and US.
> 
> In lieu of a British spook’s wife killing an American kid by wreckless driving, the FO faking her some diplomatic immunity, spiriting her out of the country then refusing US extradition requests; I’ll take Andrew flipping them the bird over this.
> 
> Fuck ‘em.


I agree with you but Dunn's Dad is actively calling for the cases to be linked which they never will be no matter how he gets his hopes up.


----------



## maomao (Jun 9, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> You miss my point. Clearly they’re separate issues but both are examples of international legal situations requiring cooperation between the U.K. and US.
> 
> In lieu of a British spook’s wife killing an American kid by wreckless driving, the FO faking her some diplomatic immunity, spiriting her out of the country then refusing US extradition requests; I’ll take Andrew flipping them the bird over this.
> 
> Fuck ‘em.


Fuck the Americans (or at least the US state) sure, but not sure about fucking an investigation into organised child abuse. I say we send him in chains.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 9, 2020)

He should be chucked in a harbour


----------



## Benjamin F (Jun 9, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> You miss my point. Clearly they’re separate issues but both are examples of international legal situations requiring cooperation between the U.K. and US.
> 
> In lieu of a British spook’s wife killing an American kid by wreckless driving, the FO faking her some diplomatic immunity, spiriting her out of the country then refusing US extradition requests; I’ll take Andrew flipping them the bird over this.
> 
> Fuck ‘em.


 
I can understand the frustration with - and hatred of - the US authorities and Harry Dunn's family desperation to get Anne Sacoolas to face trial, but usually the resolution of one injustice should not be dependent on the resolution of another injustice. That way justice is never done as it permanently delayed. 

Tying the two case together, here, provides the perfect opportunity for the authorities to do nothing in either case. The UK state can look strong - rather than corrupt - in defending their royal family because the US won't handover Harry's killer, and vice-versa.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jun 9, 2020)

Orang Utan said:


> He should be chucked in a harbour


More chance of that than him ever ending up in court on a charge.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 9, 2020)

As a gesture of good will Andrew should be sent out there in chains.  Also chuck-in rapey Assange as a BOGOF.


----------



## NoXion (Jun 9, 2020)

Teaboy said:


> As a gesture of good will Andrew should be sent out there in chains.  Also chuck-in rapey Assange as a BOGOF.



Haven't they already got their hands on Assange?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 9, 2020)

Orang Utan said:


> He should be chucked in a harbour


no, i believe he can swim

off beachy head - or durdle door - would be my preference


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 9, 2020)

Concrete socks


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 9, 2020)

NoXion said:


> Haven't they already got their hands on Assange?


Still in prison, isn't he?


----------



## NoXion (Jun 9, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> Still in prison, isn't he?



I thought the Yanks nabbed him when when he was kicked out of the embassy? I don't remember why he'd be in prison over here.


----------



## Part 2 (Jun 9, 2020)

NoXion said:


> I thought the Yanks nabbed him when when he was kicked out of the embassy? I don't remember why he'd be in prison over here.



He's in Belmarsh, hearings challenging extradition delayed until September due to covid


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 9, 2020)

NoXion said:


> I thought the Yanks nabbed him when when he was kicked out of the embassy? I don't remember why he'd be in prison over here.



No.  He was arrested for breaking his bail terms and as a result he was not given any further bail.  He's currently doing UK porridge whilst the extradition process drags on.


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 9, 2020)

NoXion said:


> I thought the Yanks nabbed him when when he was kicked out of the embassy? I don't remember why he'd be in prison over here.


He was arrested in Britain on an international arrest warrant issued by Sweden and released on bail. When the miserable slug went into the embassy to avoid extradition he breached his bail conditions so when they kicked him out he was immediately arrested and done for that. He got 50 weeks in Belmarsh and is still there because of covid


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 9, 2020)

Although Belmarsh isn't exactly the Bar L, let's face it.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 9, 2020)

equationgirl said:


> Although Belmarsh isn't exactly the Bar L, let's face it.




Why is Barlinnie so much worse than Belmarsh


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 9, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Why is Barlinnie so much worse than Belmarsh


Apparently Belmarsh is considered to be quite comfortable by comparison to the older Victorian clinks.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 9, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> Apparently Belmarsh is considered to be quite comfortable by comparison to the older Victorian clinks.



It has a double A cat unit, fuck ending up in there, supposedly almost as oppressive as ADX Florence.


----------



## Badgers (Jun 9, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> It has a double A cat unit, fuck ending up in there, supposedly almost as oppressive as ADX Florence.


The number of Cat A prisoners is quite a low % in Belmarsh but fuck going there for a game of soldiers!

I think ADX is more 'Premier League' in terms of fucking horrid


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 9, 2020)

Badgers said:


> The number of Cat A prisoners is quite a low % in Belmarsh but fuck going there for a game of soldiers!


however, andrew being an auld salt might find himself quite at home


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 9, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Why is Barlinnie so much worse than Belmarsh


every day it's porridge for breakfast. and lunch. and dinner. and made with water rather than milk.


----------



## Badgers (Jun 9, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> however, andrew being an auld salt might find himself quite at home


He is a military man. 
Would barely break a sweat in there


----------



## Sprocket. (Jun 9, 2020)

Badgers said:


> He is a military man.
> Would barely break a sweat in there


Probably trained to resist interrogation and torture too.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 9, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> every day it's porridge for breakfast. and lunch. and dinner. and made with water rather than milk.



They probably put salt on it rather than sugar. The savages.


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 9, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Why is Barlinnie so much worse than Belmarsh


I thought Belmarsh was an open prison, happy to be corrected if not.


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 9, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> They probably put salt on it rather than sugar. The savages.


It's the southern soft jessies that add sugar, not the hardened Scots.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 9, 2020)

equationgirl said:


> I thought Belmarsh was an open prison, happy to be corrected if not.


God no, very high security, esp the unit they put terrorists in


----------



## Numbers (Jun 9, 2020)

Badgers said:


> He is a military man.
> Would barely break a sweat in there


I nearly just choked on a flute of Cava


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 9, 2020)

equationgirl said:


> I thought Belmarsh was an open prison, happy to be corrected if not.



It has a tunnel from the nick to Woolwich Crown Court, so the very most dangerous and highest escape risk prisoners can be taken to court with no need for vans and so on, so it is the place of choice for terrorists and such like.


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 9, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> It has a tunnel from the nick to Woolwich Crown Court, so the very most dangerous and highest escape risk prisoners can be taken to court with no need for vans and so on, so it is the place of choice for terrorists and such like.


I see. More like Barlinnie than I thought, minus the tunnels.

Dangerous prisoners are spread around Scotland, as far as I know. Except those at the State Hospital at Carstairs, there's a lot there. I think a large number of sex offenders are in Peterhead but some are in a secure unit at Edinburgh's Saughton Prison. al-Megrahi was kept in prison at Greenock.


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 9, 2020)

Interogations of alleged or suspected terrorists tend to take place at Govan police station, in Glasgow.


----------



## 8ball (Jun 9, 2020)

This doesn't seem to be going away in the manner the Monarchy hoped.


----------



## pogofish (Jun 9, 2020)

Peterhead Prison closed a few years back. (2014?) and the sex offenders/higher category inmates were spread around other Scottish persons - Barlinnie took the top spot as Scotland’s toughest gaol after that.

Its replacement, HMP Grampian is a lower category prison, with a women’s prison and YOI combined on the same site - it is in no way Peterhead II.

After failing to get the main site of the old prison demolished/redeveloped (HMP Grampian was built in its former stone yards). SPS finally gave over to a local trust who run it as an absolutely fascinating museum now.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 9, 2020)

Prince Andrew charity broke law by paying trustee £350,000
					

Watchdog publishes highly critical report after charitable trust is required to return cash




					www.theguardian.com
				




ah, give him a fucking break.


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 9, 2020)

not-bono-ever said:


> Prince Andrew charity broke law by paying trustee £350,000
> 
> 
> Watchdog publishes highly critical report after charitable trust is required to return cash
> ...


----------



## stavros (Jun 9, 2020)

Tankus said:


> Can't we do an extradition swop.? .. Andy.... For that woman who claimed diplomatic immunity and did a runner back to the States after killing that lad in an RTA?
> 
> Seems fair



Sorry I nicked your idea in post 2,430. I hadn't paid any attention to this thread up until then, and thought I was being vaguely original.


----------



## mx wcfc (Jun 9, 2020)

stavros said:


> Sorry I nicked your idea in post 2,430. I hadn't paid any attention to this thread up until then, and thought I was being vaguely original.



Don't worry about it mate.  i haven't had an apology from tankus, for him copying my post in January.


mx wcfc said:


> Couldn't we swap him for the american women who killed that kid near a US air base?


(sits back and waits for someone to quote an even earlier post)


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 9, 2020)

Duncan2 said:


> Whilst the chain of recent events does point towards a likely future in the South Atlantic in the near term could we swap him for Anne Sacoolas?


----------



## phillm (Jun 9, 2020)

SpookyFrank said:


> Which one is Prince Andrew again?


I think we can be confident he won't be having any statues anytime soon (ever)  made for him which will save a lot of bother in the near future. And for that we can be grateful in small measure. I think we should be wary of guilt by association. Just because you repeatedly like the company of nonces over the years doesn't necessarily make you a nonce.


----------



## Raheem (Jun 9, 2020)

phillm said:


> I think we can be confident he won't be having any statues anytime soon (ever)  made for him which will save a lot of bother in the near future. And for that we can be grateful in small measure.


I hear he's very interested in statues of limitation, whatever that is.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jun 9, 2020)

Raheem said:


> I hear he's very interested in statues of limitation, whatever that is.


That'll be the Venus de Milo.


----------



## rutabowa (Jun 9, 2020)

Sure this has been posted but just in case





__





						Redirect Notice
					





					www.google.com


----------



## phillm (Jun 9, 2020)

Raheem said:


> I hear he's very interested in statues of limitation, whatever that is.


Well that's another one to tear down then.


----------



## stavros (Jun 9, 2020)

mx wcfc said:


> Don't worry about it mate.  i haven't had an apology from tankus, for him copying my post in January.
> 
> (sits back and waits for someone to quote an even earlier post)



Dominic Cummings suggested it on his blog back in about 2010.


----------



## phillm (Jun 9, 2020)

rutabowa said:


> Sure this has been posted but just in case
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I feel we can confidently say he was having Pizza and tapas in Lisbon that night which is 2'30 from Praya de luz (have just checked) so he couldn't have possibly been there. But he might have dropped in on Cliff's Portuguese villa and vineyard in Albufeira which is just 45 minutes away for a sweat-free game of Tennis batting away multiple accusations about his balls.


----------



## phillm (Jun 9, 2020)

It's probably too late for him to say "I'm a sleazy entitled spoilt rich kid with blue blood who has had my fair share of totty crumpet over the years. All of it consensual from any number of young women who threw themselves at me. I never asked their ages and I could reasonably assume they were over18. The numbers probably are over 1000 and I couldn't be expected to remember every one of them. What Epstein and others did I was not privy to and they never shared anything with me other than sycophancy. I in hindsight deeply regret my actions and apologise if anybody was inadvertently hurt. I hope this draws a line under the affair and I, of course, remain willingly available to help any relevant authorities with their enquiries. Embassaremnt at the venality of my former life prevented me in being fully candid about my behaviour up till now. I hope this statement can go some way to start the healing for all concerned and allow everybody to move on. In light of this and without prejudice I have decided to make substantial payments to some of the complainants who in turn have asked for privacy at this difficult time. This is the last statement I will be making on this matter."


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 10, 2020)

Sprocket. said:


> Probably trained to resist interrogation and torture too.


Maitlis didn't so much as have to clout him round the noggin with a Yellow Pages before the dusty-glanded nonce was chirrupping like a particularly dim and unself-aware sex canary.

Even Billy Mitchell held out long enough to get a book deal.


----------



## 8115 (Jun 10, 2020)

MickiQ said:


> Anne Sacoolas and He Who Cannot Sweat are 2 totally separate cases and any attempt to connect them together are doomed to failure, She won't come back willingly and no-one other than a US judge can make her. Being a father myself, I have sympathy for Harry Dunn's Dad but the man is flogging a horse that isn't so much dead as never existed in the first place.
> As for He Who Cannot Sweat whilst you can almost see the words "Creepy Middle Aged Nonce" hovering over his head, there does not appear to be any solid evidence of him committing any actual extraditable crimes. This is more about protecting the reputation of the Royal Family and after the last attempt no-one thinks he is up to it.
> I still think if he had tried to brazen it out and just said "Yeah I slept with this girl but she told me she was 18 and I believed her" then it would have gone a lot less hard on him than his pathetic attempt to convince the public that his word as a member of the Royal Family was beyond reproach and should be believed without question.


No solid evidence? I'm not really following this properly but I was under the impression that there was at least one woman who stated she had slept with him when she was underage. Is this not pretty good evidence?


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jun 10, 2020)

8115 said:


> No solid evidence? I'm not really following this properly but I was under the impression that there was at least one woman who stated she had slept with him when she was underage. Is this not pretty good evidence?


No. 
I slept with you last week. Is that evidence?
We know may think he's a peado, but without actual evidence...


----------



## 8115 (Jun 10, 2020)

Saul Goodman said:


> No.
> I slept with you last week. Is that evidence?
> We know may think he's a peado, but without actual evidence...


Yes it's evidence. A lie can be evidence. What you mean, is "yeah but she could always be lying" which is what people always think when women say they've been raped. Thanks for spelling it out.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jun 10, 2020)

8115 said:


> Yes it's evidence. A lie can be evidence. What you mean, is "yeah but she could always be lying" which is what people always think when women say they've been raped. Thanks for spelling it out.


Sorry, I thought you said "solid evidence". I must have misread.
Oh, no, I didn't misread.


----------



## 8115 (Jun 10, 2020)

Saul Goodman said:


> Sorry, I thought you said "solid evidence". I must have misread.
> Oh, no, I didn't misread.


I think it's solid evidence but then I believe women rarely lie about rape.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jun 10, 2020)

8115 said:


> I think it's solid evidence but then I believe women rarely lie about rape.


Nice try, but playing to the crowd doesn't alter the fact.


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 10, 2020)

8115 said:


> I think it's solid evidence but then I believe women rarely lie about rape.


There's also the photograph showing that they'd met on at least one occasion, which demonstrates Prince Andrew has at the very least a sketchy memory of events.


----------



## MickiQ (Jun 10, 2020)

8115 said:


> No solid evidence? I'm not really following this properly but I was under the impression that there was at least one woman who stated she had slept with him when she was underage. Is this not pretty good evidence?


She said she was 17 at the time so even she isn't claiming she was underage, she is claiming she was trafficked by Jeffrey Epstein. She accuses He Who Cannot Sweat of knowing that fact whereas he claims he never even met her and barely knew Epstein. There is however the famous photo of him stood next to her with his arm around her and there is loads of evidence that he and Epstein were in fact good buddies. 
The Giuffre case is pretty much dead, Whilst his magnificent interview convinced people that he's a bit of a creep who sleeps with girls the age of his daughters and a shit liar to boot;
There is no evidence (at least in the public domain) that he has done anything outright criminal.
The DoJ/FBI aren't interested in talking to him about Virginia Guiffre (that case has been dismissed in the US) but what he knows about Epstein and his trade in supplyng underage girls to the rich and powerful. It is of course possible that His Royal Nonceness doesn't actually know anything about that but his unwillingness to co-operate and answer questions is convincing no-one.


----------



## MickiQ (Jun 10, 2020)

phillm said:


> It's probably too late for him to say "I'm a sleazy entitled spoilt rich kid with blue blood who has had my fair share of totty crumpet over the years. All of it consensual from any number of young women who threw themselves at me. I never asked their ages and I could reasonably assume they were over18. The numbers probably are over 1000 and I couldn't be expected to remember every one of them. What Epstein and others did I was not privy to and they never shared anything with me other than sycophancy. I in hindsight deeply regret my actions and apologise if anybody was inadvertently hurt. I hope this draws a line under the affair and I, of course, remain willingly available to help any relevant authorities with their enquiries. Embassaremnt at the venality of my former life prevented me in being fully candid about my behaviour up till now. I hope this statement can go some way to start the healing for all concerned and allow everybody to move on. In light of this and without prejudice I have decided to make substantial payments to some of the complainants who in turn have asked for privacy at this difficult time. This is the last statement I will be making on this matter."


This^^
This is what he should have said if he had an ounce of sense in that thick privileged inbred skull of his. It is probably pretty much the truth as well but he is such an arrogant entitled prick that he seems to have believed that everyone else would swallow blindly the garbage that he came out with.
I'm a Prince don't you know appointed by divine right, we never lie and are above reproach. Wouldn't surprise me if he thinks the fairy tale of the princess and the pea actually happened.


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 10, 2020)

8115 said:


> No solid evidence? I'm not really following this properly but I was under the impression that there was at least one woman who stated she had slept with him when she was underage. Is this not pretty good evidence?


Saul's right, that's not evidence. It's an uncorroborated allegation which is strongly denied and which isn't being pursued by the US authorities.



equationgirl said:


> There's also the photograph showing that they'd met on at least one occasion, which demonstrates Prince Andrew has at the very least a sketchy memory of events.


The photo (if real - Andy's lot say it's faked-) is only evidence that they _met one time_. Not that they had sex.

There is no criminal evidence against Randy Andy.


----------



## Santino (Jun 10, 2020)

It is potentially testimonial evidence.

But really the question is, what sort of person intervenes in this conversation to make that specific point?


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 10, 2020)

Those interested in the facts rather than rants perhaps. You silly twat.


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 10, 2020)

.


----------



## Santino (Jun 10, 2020)

Yeah, people 'ranting' about sexual abuse. That's the real problem.


----------



## Santino (Jun 10, 2020)

The fact is that testimony can be evidence.


----------



## Santino (Jun 10, 2020)

I'll wait while you google.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 10, 2020)

Santino said:


> The fact is that testimony can be evidence.


Indeed testimony is by definition evidence


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 10, 2020)

Santino said:


> I'll wait while you google.


We'll be here half the morning


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 10, 2020)

Santino said:


> The fact is that testimony can be evidence.


It hasn't been raised as evidence. There's been no prosecution of Andrew so it's just something that she's said happened in the media. An allegation that he denies and that the authorities are not pursuing.


----------



## Numbers (Jun 10, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> We'll be here half the morning


We only have an hour left.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 10, 2020)

Numbers said:


> We only have an hour left.


((((Spymaster))))


----------



## TopCat (Jun 10, 2020)

The nonce defender.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jun 10, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> The photo (if real - Andy's lot say it's faked-) is only evidence that they _met one time_. Not that they had sex.


Point of order here. They no longer claim it is faked. They tried their damndest to find some evidence that it was faked and failed to do so.


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 10, 2020)

TopCat said:


> The nonce defender.


Eh?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 10, 2020)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Point of order here. They no longer claim it is faked. They tried their damndest to find some evidence that it was faked and failed to do so.


Points of order relate to conduct of a meeting, eg a request for a quorum count. What you're on about are points of information


----------



## TopCat (Jun 10, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> Eh?


Defending an obvious  nonce like Andrew. It's not a good look, reminds me of people initially going on about Savile and charity work.


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 10, 2020)

TopCat said:


> Defending an obvious  nonce like Andrew. It's not a good look, reminds me of people initially going on about Savile and charity work.


Pointing out that he is not on trial is not defending him, you silly cunt.


----------



## Sweet FA (Jun 10, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> Pointing out that he is not on trial is not defending him, you silly cunt.


SOP though - I remember the thousands of words you wrote defending that rapist footballer.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 10, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> Pointing out that he is not on trial is not defending him, you silly cunt.


I'm glad you're not defending him, spy


----------



## Sprocket. (Jun 10, 2020)

How many pallets of chlorinated chicken could we get for Andrew?


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jun 10, 2020)

TopCat said:


> The nonce defender.


Good Lord TC, that isn't what's happening.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 10, 2020)

Sprocket. said:


> How many pallets of chlorinated chicken could we get for Andrew?


Enough to crush him, I'll chuck in £50 to get you started


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 10, 2020)

Sweet FA said:


> SOP though - I remember the thousands of words you wrote defending that rapist footballer.


No you don't because it didn't happen, although you and one or two others may have tried to spin it that way. What you remember are my posts regarding the admissability of the new evidence in the Ched Evans case.


----------



## Sweet FA (Jun 10, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> No you don't because it didn't happen, although you and one or two others may have tried to spin it that way. What you remember are my posts regarding the admissability of the new evidence in the Ched Evans case.


I don't think I ever posted on the thread so no spin here. I read it though. You came off like you were defending him. Maybe it's the way you go about it; the way you interact with people on those/these threads. You can be right without being a cock about it. Particularly when you're talking about rape. The gleeful point scoring is pretty nauseating sometimes.



eta It appears I did post on that thread once - after half a dozen pages of you and Athos doing your thing:



Sweet FA said:


> Well done lads, great thread to be waving your cocks around on. Pages and pages of it. Have a fucking look at yourselves.


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 10, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> Saul's right, that's not evidence. It's an uncorroborated allegation which is strongly denied and which isn't being pursued by the US authorities.
> 
> 
> The photo (if real - Andy's lot say it's faked-) is only evidence that they _met one time_. Not that they had sex.
> ...


He denied even meeting her,  the photo is proof (if real) that they did. I did not claim it was proof of sex.


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 10, 2020)

Sweet FA said:


> I don't think I ever posted on the thread so no spin here. I read it though. You came off like you were defending him. Maybe it's the way you go about it; the way you interact with people on those/these threads. You can be right without being a cock about it. Particularly when you're talking about rape. The gleeful point scoring is pretty nauseating sometimes.


Fair enough but the trouble is, on these boards anyone looking into such subjects in slightly more depth than screaming "nonce" or "rapist" immediately gets branded a supporter of the said perp, which is quite obviously bollocks and deeply offensive. Not that I mind being deeply offended but what's good for the goose is good for the gander so if TopCat can lie about me being a 'nonce defender' I can lie about him being a goat-fucking, Werther's Original merchant who shags his mum.


----------



## 8ball (Jun 10, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> Indeed testimony is by definition evidence



That will make a lot of arguments on Urban a lot quicker.


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 10, 2020)

equationgirl said:


> He denied even meeting her,  the photo is proof (if real) that they did. I did not claim it was proof of sex.


He said he had no recollection as I recall, but anyway, littlebabyjesus's clarification makes the point moot now.


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 10, 2020)

MickiQ said:


> She said she was 17 at the time so even she isn't claiming she was underage, she is claiming she was trafficked by Jeffrey Epstein. She accuses He Who Cannot Sweat of knowing that fact whereas he claims he never even met her and barely knew Epstein. There is however the famous photo of him stood next to her with his arm around her and there is loads of evidence that he and Epstein were in fact good buddies.
> The Giuffre case is pretty much dead, Whilst his magnificent interview convinced people that he's a bit of a creep who sleeps with girls the age of his daughters and a shit liar to boot;
> There is no evidence (at least in the public domain) that he has done anything outright criminal.
> The DoJ/FBI aren't interested in talking to him about Virginia Guiffre (that case has been dismissed in the US) but what he knows about Epstein and his trade in supplyng underage girls to the rich and powerful. It is of course possible that His Royal Nonceness doesn't actually know anything about that but his unwillingness to co-operate and answer questions is convincing no-one.


The second criminal case was dismissed, primarily as Epstein was dead by that point. A number of civil cases between Guiffre and others have all been settled, including Ghislaine Maxwell. She and other defendants won in a case under the Crime Victims Rights Act, which determined victims rights had been violated in the first criminal case where Epstein was given a spectacular deal.


----------



## Sweet FA (Jun 10, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> Fair enough but the trouble is, on these boards anyone looking into such subjects in slightly more depth than screaming "nonce" or "rapist" immediately gets branded a supporter of the said perp, which is quite obviously bollocks and deeply offensive. Not that I mind being deeply offended but what's good for the goose is good for the gander so if TopCat can lie about me being a 'nonce defender' I can lie about him being a goat-fucking, Werther's Original merchant who shags his mum.


You're a truth-seeking missile & there might be some collateral damage along the way 

I get what you're saying. Anyway, it's your schtick; it's not going to change. Sometimes it works; other times (it looks like) you end up defending rapists; swings and roundabouts. 

Say what you like about TC though; he's never stolen a dog's face and worn it to a party.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 10, 2020)

Sweet FA said:


> You're a truth-seeking missile & there might be some collateral damage along the way
> 
> I get what you're saying. Anyway, it's your schtick; it's not going to change. Sometimes it works; other times (it looks like) you end up defending rapists; swings and roundabouts.
> 
> Say what you like about TC though; *he's never stolen a dog's face and worn it to a party.*


Is this becoming a thing?  🤣


----------



## phillm (Jun 10, 2020)

Threads should turn red when there is a bunfight going on so you can seek them out.


----------



## Sweet FA (Jun 10, 2020)

Orang Utan said:


> Is this becoming a thing?  🤣


Dogface larceny? Let's hope not; we must remain vigilant however. Clair De Lune referred to it too last week


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 10, 2020)

Sweet FA said:


> Dogface larceny? Let's hope not; we must remain vigilant however. Clair De Lune referred to it too last week


----------



## MickiQ (Jun 10, 2020)

equationgirl said:


> The second criminal case was dismissed, primarily as Epstein was dead by that point. A number of civil cases between Guiffre and others have all been settled, including Ghislaine Maxwell. She and other defendants won in a case under the Crime Victims Rights Act, which determined victims rights had been violated in the first criminal case where Epstein was given a spectacular deal.


I meant the case against He Who Cannot Sweat  was dimissed, the US has already decided he has no case to answer. Guiffre is no doubt aggrieved against him but would I suspect be happy to settle for a heartfelt apology and an admission he wronged her. The question is what if anything did he know about what Epstein was doing, they were clearly good friends so even if they didn't sit around the fireside openly discussing it, it beggars belief that HWCS didn't at least suspect something.
Epstein's first trial was a farce, Even allowing for him being able to afford the best lawyers he was clearly being shielded by rich and powerful friends and it is a stain on the US legal system that it took so long (apparently due to a few FBI agents who wouldn't let it drop) for a second investigation to get anywhere.
I'm one of those who do think there is a good possibility that Epstein was killed, It doesn't take any great conspiracy or cover up to have done it.
In the circles he moved in the line between the legal and illegal is no doubt is very blurry. It only takes one of those rich and powerful ex-friends to decide they're better off with Epstein dead. Nor does it take much to make it happen, bribes for one or two people to look the other way and a single assassin to do the deed. This in a city in which official corruption is not exactly unknown. There's no need for loony theories like the CIA/Russians/Trump/Illuminati did it.


----------



## TopCat (Jun 10, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> a goat-fucking, Werther's Original merchant who shags his mum.


i love it.


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 10, 2020)

MickiQ said:


> I meant the case against He Who Cannot Sweat  was dimissed, the US has already decided he has no case to answer. Guiffre is no doubt aggrieved against him but would I suspect be happy to settle for a heartfelt apology and an admission he wronged her. The question is what if anything did he know about what Epstein was doing, they were clearly good friends so even if they didn't sit around the fireside openly discussing it, it beggars belief that HWCS didn't at least suspect something.
> Epstein's first trial was a farce, Even allowing for him being able to afford the best lawyers he was clearly being shielded by rich and powerful friends and it is a stain on the US legal system that it took so long (apparently due to a few FBI agents who wouldn't let it drop) for a second investigation to get anywhere.
> I'm one of those who do think there is a good possibility that Epstein was killed, It doesn't take any great conspiracy or cover up to have done it.
> In the circles he moved in the line between the legal and illegal is no doubt is very blurry. It only takes one of those rich and powerful ex-friends to decide they're better off with Epstein dead. Nor does it take much to make it happen, bribes for one or two people to look the other way and a single assassin to do the deed. This in a city in which official corruption is not exactly unknown. There's no need for loony theories like the CIA/Russians/Trump/Illuminati did it.


So you say the same as me, you get a like and I get "nonce defender"


----------



## Aladdin (Jun 10, 2020)

..do


----------



## Aladdin (Jun 10, 2020)

..do


----------



## Aladdin (Jun 10, 2020)

Watch Jeffrey Epstein Filthy Rich. 

Then come back and say the women are not credible witnesses


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 10, 2020)

Who's said they're not credible witnesses?


----------



## MickiQ (Jun 10, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> So you say the same as me, you get a like and I get "nonce defender"


It's my good looks and my boyish charm that carries the day


----------



## kabbes (Jun 10, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> So you say the same as me, you get a like and I get "nonce defender"


If you think that’s true, maybe it’s worth also having a think about why it happened?


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 10, 2020)

kabbes said:


> If you think that’s true, maybe it’s worth also having a think about why it happened?


Maybe it's also worth you fucking off.


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 10, 2020)

MickiQ said:


> It's my good looks and my boyish charm that carries the day


If those were the criteria, I'd be the most popular poster here!


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jun 10, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> If those were the criteria, I'd be the most popular poster here!


I beg to differ


----------



## kabbes (Jun 10, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> Maybe it's also worth you fucking off.


We could always do both


----------



## discokermit (Jun 10, 2020)

Sugar Kane said:


> ..do





Sugar Kane said:


> ..do


..do

c'mon and do the conga.


----------



## 8ball (Jun 10, 2020)

discokermit said:


> ..do
> 
> c'mon and do the conga.



I owe you one really nasty earworm.


----------



## discokermit (Jun 10, 2020)

8ball said:


> I owe you one really nasty earworm.


welcome to my world.


----------



## 8ball (Jun 10, 2020)

discokermit said:


> welcome to my world.



That's somewhat preferable, I guess.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 10, 2020)

8ball said:


> I owe you one really nasty earworm.





Spoiler: come and dance every night


----------



## 8ball (Jun 10, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> Spoiler: come and dance every night




My revenge will be served cold.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jun 10, 2020)

Sugar Kane said:


> ..do





Sugar Kane said:


> ..do





Spoiler: ..do


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 10, 2020)

8ball said:


> My revenge will be served cold.


Why would you even open that spoiler?


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jun 10, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> Why would you even open that spoiler?


Here, hold this dog turd for me, and see if you get shit on your hand.


----------



## Aladdin (Jun 11, 2020)

__





						Redirect Notice
					





					www.google.com
				




Looks like he's not out of the woods yet.


----------



## spanglechick (Jun 11, 2020)

phillm said:


> It's probably too late for him to say "I'm a sleazy entitled spoilt rich kid with blue blood who has had my fair share of totty crumpet over the years. All of it consensual from any number of young women who threw themselves at me. I never asked their ages and I could reasonably assume they were over18. The numbers probably are over 1000 and I couldn't be expected to remember every one of them. What Epstein and others did I was not privy to and they never shared anything with me other than sycophancy. I in hindsight deeply regret my actions and apologise if anybody was inadvertently hurt. I hope this draws a line under the affair and I, of course, remain willingly available to help any relevant authorities with their enquiries. Embassaremnt at the venality of my former life prevented me in being fully candid about my behaviour up till now. I hope this statement can go some way to start the healing for all concerned and allow everybody to move on. In light of this and without prejudice I have decided to make substantial payments to some of the complainants who in turn have asked for privacy at this difficult time. This is the last statement I will be making on this matter."


Yeah.  Especially since an ex employee says he saw HRH grinding his crotch against a semi-naked seventeen year old girl in a swimming pool.  

the Netflix doc is with the time, btw.  Epstein was much nastier than I’d realised, and Maxwell was so heavily involved for so many years I can’t believe she’s avoiding jail.


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 11, 2020)

spanglechick said:


> Yeah.  Especially since an ex employee says he saw HRH grinding his crotch against a semi-naked seventeen year old girl in a swimming pool.
> 
> the Netflix doc is with the time, btw.  Epstein was much nastier than I’d realised, and Maxwell was so heavily involved for so many years I can’t believe she’s avoiding jail.


She's in hiding apparently, and lawsuits can't be served on her as she's refusing to let her lawyers accept on her behalf. Last seen in North America (Manchester by the sea) staying with a then boyfriend who appears to have severed his relationship with her when everything came to light.


----------



## Aladdin (Jun 11, 2020)

equationgirl said:


> She's in hiding apparently, and lawsuits can't be served on her as she's refusing to let her lawyers accept on her behalf. Last seen in North America (Manchester by the sea) staying with a then boyfriend who appears to have severed his relationship with her when everything came to light.




Probably has a new identity and face by now.


----------



## MrSki (Jun 11, 2020)

Looks like tory MP Phillip Dunne enters the story. His number found in Epstein's little black book.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jun 11, 2020)

MrSki said:


> Looks like tory MP Phillip Dunne enters the story. His number found in Epstein's little black book.



I'd be shocked to discover a Tory MP was a paedophile.


----------



## Raheem (Jun 11, 2020)

Saul Goodman said:


> I'd be shocked to discover a Tory MP was a paedophile.


Careful what you say. Everyone's entitled to be considered innocent until such time as the prime minister accepts their ridiculous explanation.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jun 11, 2020)

Raheem said:


> Careful what you say. Everyone's entitled to be considered innocent until such time as the prime minister accepts their ridiculous explanation.


I absolutely believe in innocence until proven guilty, it just seems that an awful lot of these public schoolboy types turn out to be nonces. I wonder why that might be.


----------



## DJWrongspeed (Jun 12, 2020)

It's not looking good here either :  Duke of York's charity broke law by paying trustee £350,000


----------



## Badgers (Jun 12, 2020)

Still think that somehow Andy will have this swept under the carpet


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jun 12, 2020)

Badgers said:


> Still think that somehow Andy will have this swept under the carpet


I'll be very surprised if it isn't.


----------



## Badgers (Jun 12, 2020)

Saul Goodman said:


> I'll be very surprised if it isn't.


Sad isn't it. 

Obviously he won't personally sweep it under the carpet. Feckless faux squaddie that he is. The Royal House will pull the strings. 

Be nice to see a Tory get held to account if involved. Be even nice if the greedy little weasal spills his guts and implements some other cubts. The House of Commons does not have the clout of the royals to cover up.


----------



## andysays (Jun 12, 2020)

Badgers said:


> Still think that somehow Andy will have this swept under the carpet


Gonna need a bloody big carpet


----------



## lefteri (Jun 12, 2020)

8ball said:


> That's somewhat preferable, I guess.



or infinitely preferable:


----------



## two sheds (Jun 12, 2020)

Badgers said:


> Obviously he won't personally sweep it under the carpet.



They have minions to sweep things under carpets.


----------



## stavros (Jun 12, 2020)

Sugar Kane said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> ...



He's seeing multiple bishops and cardinals heading the other way though.


----------



## agricola (Jun 12, 2020)

Badgers said:


> Still think that somehow Andy will have this swept under the carpet



no chance of that, people would start asking about the other people linked to Epstein then


----------



## Orang Utan (Jul 2, 2020)

Time to sweat Andy:








						Jeffrey Epstein Confidante Ghislaine Maxwell Arrested on Sex Abuse Charges
					

Ghislaine Maxwell, the British socialite and heiress who became a confidante of disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein and was later implicated in his alleged sexual crimes, has been arrested by the FBI. She was arrested in Bradford, New Hampshire, around 8:30 a.m. Thursday on charges she conspired...




					www.nbcnewyork.com


----------



## dessiato (Jul 2, 2020)

Here too

BBC News - Jeffrey Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell arrested by FBI








						Jeffrey Epstein ex-girlfriend Ghislaine Maxwell charged in US
					

She is accused of grooming underage girls for the late paedophile Jeffrey Epstein and lying about it.



					www.bbc.co.uk
				




Ghislaine Maxwell arrested by FBI on charges related to Jeffrey Epstein









						Ghislaine Maxwell appears in court charged with aiding Epstein's sex crimes
					

Maxwell arrested in New Hampshire early Thursday morning, as 17-page, six-count indictment lays out charges




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 2, 2020)

> She was arrested in Bedford, New Hampshire around 8:30 a.m. on charges she conspired with Epstein to sexually abuse minors



Sounds like there may be serious time up for grabs on a charge like that.

A plea deal is her best bet to avoid seeing out her days in stir.

Sweaty times indeed, Andy.


----------



## dessiato (Jul 2, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Sounds like there may be serious time up for grabs on a charge like that.
> 
> A plea deal is her best bet to avoid seeing out her days in stir.
> 
> Sweaty times indeed, Andy.


Not for Andy, he doesn't sweat. Squeaky bum time instead?


----------



## Johnny Doe (Jul 2, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Sounds like there may be serious time up for grabs on a charge like that.
> 
> A plea deal is her best bet to avoid seeing out her days in stir.
> 
> Sweaty times indeed, Andy.



Indeed, she'll sing like a canary unless she somehow manages to top herself despite being a high profile risk....


----------



## tim (Jul 2, 2020)

dessiato said:


> Here too
> 
> BBC News - Jeffrey Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell arrested by FBI
> 
> ...



Will she end up with a sore throat like her boyfriend or go bob-bob-bobbing along like her dad did?

Was Robert Maxwell murdered?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 2, 2020)

Kind of surprised she's still alive. Even more surprised that she was still in the US. Didn't find anyone to help her escape to a non-extradition country then? Or just really stupid.


----------



## TopCat (Jul 2, 2020)

It will be fucking brazen if she dies. I expect though given it's the FBI who nicked her they will coop her up somewhere safe whilst she sings. 
Whether they act on the information rather depends on what it is and about whom. 
If she names an ex president for instance they might bury it.


----------



## Teaboy (Jul 2, 2020)

TopCat said:


> It will be fucking brazen if she dies. I expect though given it's the FBI who nicked her they will coop her up somewhere safe whilst she sings.
> Whether they act on the information rather depends on what it is and about whom.
> If she names an ex president for instance they might bury it.



Or indeed, an existing president.


----------



## MrSki (Jul 2, 2020)




----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 2, 2020)

Turned out nice again


----------



## tim (Jul 2, 2020)

TopCat said:


> It will be fucking brazen if she dies. I expect though given it's the FBI who nicked her they will coop her up somewhere safe whilst she sings.
> Whether they act on the information rather depends on what it is and about whom.
> If she names an ex president for instance they might bury it.



I thought it was pretty brazen the first time Epstein was found hanging, but was cut down and revived.


----------



## MrSki (Jul 2, 2020)




----------



## Badgers (Jul 2, 2020)

Hope she sings like a bird. 

Then Randy Andy follows suit and drags down countless other rich ponce rapists.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jul 2, 2020)

Badgers said:


> Hope she sings like a bird.
> Then Randy Andy follows suit and drags down countless other rich ponce rapists.


FFY


----------



## souljacker (Jul 2, 2020)

She's minted (I assume. Cap'n Bob must have stashed some of it away) and well connected. I wouldn't be at all surprised if she walks like Epstein did first time round.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jul 2, 2020)

She probably has Trumpdirt too


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 2, 2020)

souljacker said:


> She's minted (I assume. Cap'n Bob must have stashed some of it away) and well connected. I wouldn't be at all surprised if she walks like Epstein did first time round.



By all accounts she’s not. Bobbing Bob seems to have cast her adrift when he went for a swim and the cupboard was bare. Which is why she was sniffing around those who did have wedge.


----------



## Johnny Doe (Jul 2, 2020)

souljacker said:


> She's minted (I assume. Cap'n Bob must have stashed some of it away) and well connected. I wouldn't be at all surprised if she walks like Epstein did first time round.



Not so sure post Epstein's 'suicide'. I wondered if The Donald might be implicated. but a bit of a web search looks like a much as a twat he is, his Epstein interaction seems to have involved adult models and potentially pre the worst of Epstein's rap sheet


----------



## equationgirl (Jul 2, 2020)

souljacker said:


> She's minted (I assume. Cap'n Bob must have stashed some of it away) and well connected. I wouldn't be at all surprised if she walks like Epstein did first time round.


Might not be liquid, but might have some property in her name. Rumoured to have property in London.

Seems to prefer freeloading off others though.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 2, 2020)

17 pages  


> The 17-page, six-count indictment filed by the FBI charges Maxwell with a host of crimes, including conspiracy to entice minors to travel to engage in illegal sex acts, enticement of a minor to travel to engage in illegal sex acts, conspiracy to transport minors with intent to engage in criminal sexual activity, transportation of a minor with intent to engage in criminal sexual activity, and perjury.



Including a nice perjury to round things off.

Her only hope of seeing streets again is if she sings louder and prouder than Tenby male voice choir!


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 2, 2020)

lets hope she drags in as many as possible. Where has blocks on sending back Yanks to the great satan ? CH used to but not sure these days


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jul 2, 2020)

Coincidence?


----------



## Raheem (Jul 2, 2020)

Saul Goodman said:


> Coincidence?


The Jimmy Savile costume's a bit brazen.


----------



## jakejb79 (Jul 2, 2020)

Saul Goodman said:


> Coincidence?


I thought it was meant to be Myra Hindley


----------



## extra dry (Jul 2, 2020)




----------



## petee (Jul 2, 2020)

i've been to NH a number of times, splendidly beautiful but largely poor. i did a quick look up of the town where they found her, it appears to be more prosperous than average. i wonder if some of the properties there aren't second houses for NYers or massholes.


----------



## Teaboy (Jul 2, 2020)

For good reason its all going to be about Epstein and the peado prince but, fucking hell.   If half of what is being said about her is true what a fucked up person.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 2, 2020)

Mysteriously and conveniently dead within a week I reckon


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 2, 2020)

Teaboy said:


> For good reason its all going to be about Epstein and the peado prince but, fucking hell.   If half of what is being said about her is true what a fucked up person.



As obsessed with sex as Epstein, if not more by all accounts.


----------



## tim (Jul 2, 2020)

Harry Smiles said:


> Not so sure post Epstein's 'suicide'. I wondered if The Donald might be implicated. but a bit of a web search looks like a much as a twat he is, his Epstein interaction seems to have involved adult models and potentially pre the worst of Epstein's rap sheet



Suprised your search didn't uncover this _nudge, nudge, wank, wank_ quote :



“I’ve known Jeff for 15 years. Terrific guy,” Mr. Trump told New York magazine in 2002. “He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side.”

Jeffrey Epstein Was a ‘Terrific Guy,’ Donald Trump Once Said. Now He’s ‘Not a Fan.’

Old Pervy Locks acknowledging and revelling in the very worst of it.


----------



## Raheem (Jul 2, 2020)

tim said:


> Suprised your search didn't uncover this _nudge, nudge, wank, wank_ quote :
> 
> 
> 
> ...


A vintage example of the Trumpian "people say" rhetorical device, there.


----------



## BigTom (Jul 2, 2020)

Ghislaine Maxwell has been arrested by the FBI: Jeffrey Epstein Confidante Ghislaine Maxwell Arrested on Sex Abuse Charges

did not expect that 
Charged with sex trafficking offences

edit: sorry for some reason didn't notice all the posts above were new.


----------



## Johnny Doe (Jul 2, 2020)

tim said:


> Suprised your search didn't uncover this _nudge, nudge, wank, wank_ quote :
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I am surprised that wasn't the top Google return! Grim.


----------



## Idris2002 (Jul 2, 2020)

Here she is at Chelsea Clinton's wedding:



There was a claim the other week that she was shagging BC, which accounted for his mysteriously frequent appearance on the passenger lists of the Lolita Express. When I heard that I could only wonder if it was a cover for something worse. . .


----------



## two sheds (Jul 2, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> As obsessed with sex as Epstein, if not more by all accounts.



and/or power


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 2, 2020)

petee said:


> i've been to NH a number of times, splendidly beautiful but largely poor. i did a quick look up of the town where they found her, it appears to be more prosperous than average. i wonder if some of the properties there aren't second houses for NYers or massholes.



Indeed. Its maybe a lakeside option for those that tire of the hamptons or Cape Cod. Beautiful area tho, can very New England chocolate boxy. Decent airport at manchester that helps. winnepasaukee and the lakes are just up the road


----------



## petee (Jul 2, 2020)

not-bono-ever said:


> Indeed. Its maybe a lakeside option for those that tire of the hamptons or Cape Cod. Beautiful area tho, can very New England chocolate boxy. Decent airport at manchester that helps. winnepasaukee and the lakes are just up the road



i went to camp at lake ossippee.


----------



## Aladdin (Jul 2, 2020)

Badgers said:


> Hope she sings like a bird.
> 
> Then Randy Andy follows suit and drags down countless other rich ponce rapists.




Randy Andy will have an unfortunate fatal accident.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 2, 2020)

Sugar Kane said:


> Randy Andy will have an unfortunate fatal accident.



I live in hope.


----------



## Raheem (Jul 2, 2020)

Sugar Kane said:


> Randy Andy will have an unfortunate fatal accident.


Unfortunate or fatal? You can't have both.


----------



## wayward bob (Jul 2, 2020)

i do hate to hear so many people mangling "ghislaine" (i know one, not that one...)

(in the scheme of things happy to live with it )


----------



## Aladdin (Jul 2, 2020)

Raheem said:


> Unfortunate or fatal? You can't have both.



He deserves both.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 2, 2020)

wayward bob said:


> i do hate to hear so many people mangling "ghislaine" (i know one, not that one...)
> 
> (in the scheme of things happy to live with it )



Gee-Lane isn’t it?


----------



## Raheem (Jul 2, 2020)

She's slain.

Nominative determinism.


----------



## wayward bob (Jul 2, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Gee-Lane isn’t it?


gi (hard/short) - len


----------



## Orang Utan (Jul 2, 2020)

Oh so it isn’t Jizz-Lane?


----------



## Raheem (Jul 2, 2020)

Orang Utan said:


> Oh so it isn’t Jizz-Lane?


Sorry, I don't know her address.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jul 2, 2020)

Raheem said:


> Sorry, I don't know her address.


999 Letsby Avenue


----------



## wayward bob (Jul 2, 2020)

Orang Utan said:


> Oh so it isn’t Jizz-Lane?


no wonder the one i know (not that one) goes by something else...


----------



## lizzieloo (Jul 2, 2020)

Orang Utan said:


> 999 Letsby Avenue


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 2, 2020)

Dashed bad luck for Andrew, can’t even console himself with a Feast of the Royals, seeing as Pizza Express in Woking is shut until Saturday.


----------



## MickiQ (Jul 2, 2020)

Raheem said:


> Unfortunate or fatal? You can't have both.


I would imagine all fatal accidents are unfortunate, you can't really have a fortunate fatal accident. It doesn't really matter so much her naming names per se, that's just her word against rich and powerful people whose lawyers will wheedle their way out of it. The key question is whether or not she can point the Feds in the direction of hard evidence.
If Epstein had proof, she's probably the one person who knows where it is. I can imagine that He Who Cannot Sweat is probably going to being bricking it for a while.


----------



## Marty1 (Jul 2, 2020)

Apart from sweating - where does this leave Perve Andrew then as there’s zero chance he’s ever going to step foot on American soil again?


----------



## Boris Sprinkler (Jul 2, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> Apart from sweating - where does this leave Perve Andrew then as there’s zero chance he’s ever going to step foot on American soil again?












						Jobseeker's Allowance (JSA)
					

Jobseeker's Allowance (JSA) is an unemployment benefit you can claim while looking for work - how to apply online, new style JSA, eligibility, rates, rapid reclaim, JSA interview, when payment can be stopped




					www.gov.uk


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 2, 2020)

wayward bob said:


> i do hate to hear so many people mangling "ghislaine" (i know one, not that one...)
> 
> (in the scheme of things happy to live with it )



Horrible name however you say it tbf.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 2, 2020)

MickiQ said:


> I would imagine all fatal accidents are unfortunate, you can't really have a fortunate fatal accident. It doesn't really matter so much her naming names per se, that's just her word against rich and powerful people whose lawyers will wheedle their way out of it. The key question is whether or not she can point the Feds in the direction of hard evidence.
> If Epstein had proof, she's probably the one person who knows where it is. I can imagine that He Who Cannot Sweat is probably going to being bricking it for a while.



Re fortunate/unfortunate accidents; was jolly handy for the monarchy that the mother of the future head of the Church of England didn’t convert to Islam.

If this Maxwell person can give dates, times and actions it will be sweaty bums time for HRH and a number of other of our ‘betters’. I very much dislike American ‘justice’, but every now and then it goes after the rich and powerful and rather than employing the tactics it uses against the plebs (plead guilty to this bollocks or get a gazillion years) it establishes a concrete case. In such a circumstance the only way to avoid life without parole is to grass. Who wouldn’t?


----------



## wayward bob (Jul 2, 2020)

SpookyFrank said:


> Horrible name however you say it tbf.


no


----------



## Sprocket. (Jul 2, 2020)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Mysteriously and conveniently dead within a week I reckon


Genetic programming?


----------



## two sheds (Jul 2, 2020)

SpookyFrank said:


> Horrible name however you say it tbf.


Nice name horrible person.


----------



## Sprocket. (Jul 2, 2020)

Andrew will now be sweating more than Fred West watching Ground Force.


----------



## Marty1 (Jul 2, 2020)

Sprocket. said:


> Andrew will now be sweating more than Fred West watching Ground Force.



Slight problem with that.....

Has he recovered from his adrenaline overdose from the Faulklands?


----------



## salem (Jul 2, 2020)

TopCat said:


> If she names an ex president for instance they might bury it.


I suspect Trump is keeping a close eye, a good mention of Bill may see it gain a lot of traction before the elections.


----------



## Sprocket. (Jul 2, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> Slight problem with that.....
> 
> Has he recovered from his adrenaline overdose from the Faulklands?


The only adrenaline overdose he’ll be suffering from now is one that’s brown and fills his pants.


----------



## tim (Jul 2, 2020)

salem said:


> I suspect Trump is keeping a close eye, a good mention of Bill may see it gain a lot of traction before the elections.




I've got a close eye on where his right hand is.


----------



## petee (Jul 2, 2020)

petee said:


> i've been to NH a number of times, splendidly beautiful but largely poor. i did a quick look up of the town where they found her, it appears to be more prosperous than average. i wonder if some of the properties there aren't second houses for NYers or massholes.



i want to know the chain of ownership on this





			https://www.movoto.com/bradford-nh/338-e-washington-rd-bradford-nh-03221/pid_epzkyf4nih/


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 2, 2020)

I cant remeber how the axis of guilt was spread amongst the ofspring of Captn Bob, but I do recall that there were rumours that she was more important in the whole thing than she got credit(debit?) for actually were. I might have to google it though. Any way, whatever happens now, her life as a socialite is surely fucked


----------



## Wilf (Jul 3, 2020)

Sprocket. said:


> The only adrenaline overdose he’ll be suffering from now is one that’s brown and fills his pants.


His kecks will be full of brown windsor soup.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 3, 2020)

__





						MarineTraffic: Global Ship Tracking Intelligence | AIS Marine Traffic
					

MarineTraffic Live Ships Map. Discover information and vessel positions for vessels around the world. Search the MarineTraffic ships database of more than 550000 active and decommissioned vessels. Search for popular ships globally. Find locations of ports and ships using the near Real Time ships...



					www.marinetraffic.com
				




anyway, the former Yacht of Bob has been moored in NZ for a month, so its not like is was going to be part of some daring fly by night escape plan for G.


----------



## Celyn (Jul 3, 2020)

I see that the "Daily Mail" is as wonderful as ever.

"The charges apply to incidents between 1994 and 1997 and involve three victims, "the youngest of which was 14 when Maxwell 'groomed' her  ..."

The youngest of *WHICH?   *.    Interestingly and worryingly horrible. Those young women are now suddenly mere things. Inanimate objects. It would have a very simple matter to say "the youngest of whom was 14 ..."


----------



## dessiato (Jul 3, 2020)

Celyn said:


> I see that the "Daily Mail" is as wonderful as ever.
> 
> "The charges apply to incidents between 1994 and 1997 and involve three victims, "the youngest of which was 14 when Maxwell 'groomed' her  ..."
> 
> The youngest of *WHICH?   *.    Interestingly and worryingly horrible. Those young women are now suddenly mere things. Inanimate objects. It would have a very simple matter to say "the youngest of whom was 14 ..."


You are assuming a level of empathy of which the Mail has none.


----------



## Maltin (Jul 3, 2020)

Given what has happened before in this whole scandal, it seems a strange coincidence that she was arrested in a state whose motto is Live Free or Die?


----------



## dessiato (Jul 3, 2020)

Maltin said:


> Given what has happened before in this whole scandal, it seems a strange coincidence that she was arrested in a state whose motto is Live Free or Die?


It might be a prediction. In which case we might be seeing a lot of A-list people quietly shuffling off this mortal coil.


----------



## dessiato (Jul 3, 2020)

Interesting. His people claim they’ve been in touch with the DoJ, but have not had a response.

I think he’s up to his neck in the shit and he thinks he’s a long way down to go yet.









						Prince Andrew under pressure after arrest of Ghislaine Maxwell
					

Royal ‘bewildered’ after US attorney asks him to come forward following arrest of his friend over alleged sex crimes




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## flypanam (Jul 3, 2020)

TopCat said:


> If she names an ex president for instance they might bury it.



Maybe a certain ex PM might be busy deleting names and dates from his records, and getting a story or two straight.


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Jul 3, 2020)

wayward bob said:


> gi (hard/short) - len


The internet says "jiz-len" with a soft "J" like in "Je" in French.

I'd probably pronounce her name "nasty evil cunt" myself but that's just me.


----------



## DJWrongspeed (Jul 3, 2020)

I was reading about Epstein's business career yesterday. He was well dodgy and to think of all the rich and famous people wanting hang out with him? Even without the paedophilia he was crook.


----------



## maomao (Jul 3, 2020)

Mrs Miggins said:


> The internet says "jiz-len" with a soft "J" like in "Je" in French.
> 
> I'd probably pronounce her name "nasty evil cunt" myself but that's just me.


Apparently hard g or soft g are both used. She seems to have used a hard g though there were at least three different pronunciations of the second syllable by different people in the Epstein doc on Netflix.


----------



## wayward bob (Jul 3, 2020)

Mrs Miggins said:


> The internet says "jiz-len" with a soft "J" like in "Je" in French.


the internet also says gi-len 

 French


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 3, 2020)

not-bono-ever said:


> Any way, whatever happens now, her life as a socialite is surely fucked


On the ‘posh party invites list’ she’ll be somewhere between Peter Sutcliffe and Charles Manson.


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Jul 3, 2020)

wayward bob said:


> the internet also says gi-len
> 
> French


Oh well. Who trusts the internet anyway?


----------



## flypanam (Jul 3, 2020)

DJWrongspeed said:


> I was reading about Epstein's business career yesterday. He was well dodgy and to think of all the rich and famous people wanting hang out with him? Even without the pedophilia he was crook.



Liz Hurley’s ex and recently deceased Steve Bing was best mates with JE.









						Steve Bing's girlfriend 'urged him to expose paedophile pal Jeffery Epstein'
					

Liz Hurley's ex Steve was said to have been urged by his late girlfriend to speak out about 'what he did know' about paedophile Jeffrey Epstein




					www.google.com


----------



## andysays (Jul 3, 2020)

flypanam said:


> Liz Hurley’s ex and recently deceased Steve Bing was best mates with JE.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The late Steve Bing's late girlfriend, eh.

Certainly seems like many people associated with Epstein have died suddenly and in somewhat ambiguous circumstances...


----------



## hegley (Jul 3, 2020)

flypanam said:


> Liz Hurley’s ex and recently deceased Steve Bing was best mates with JE.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It specifically says in that article that SB and JE weren't close so best mates is a bit of a stretch.


----------



## Raheem (Jul 3, 2020)

wayward bob said:


> the internet also says gi-len
> 
> French


I've got a feeling I'm never going to be introduced to her anyway.


----------



## agricola (Jul 3, 2020)

flypanam said:


> Maybe a certain ex PM might be busy deleting names and dates from his records, and getting a story or two straight.



at least he has a lot of practice at doing that


----------



## andysays (Jul 3, 2020)

hegley said:


> It specifically says in that article that SB and JE weren't close so best mates is a bit of a stretch.


It specifically says that the gf's aunt, the source of the whole story, says they weren't close, though she may not necessarily know the extent of their closeness, and she may also not be 100% reliable.


----------



## 8ball (Jul 3, 2020)

Celyn said:


> The youngest of *WHICH?   *.    Interestingly and worryingly horrible. Those young women are now suddenly mere things. Inanimate objects. It would have a very simple matter to say "the youngest of whom was 14 ..."



Is that not a correct usage?  Got an inkling I've read similar various places.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 3, 2020)

dessiato said:


> Interesting. His people claim they’ve been in touch with the DoJ, but have not had a response.
> 
> I think he’s up to his neck in the shit and he thinks he’s a long way down to go yet.
> 
> ...




Dredging through the murk of His Royal Nonceness's bullshit, it seems that he has offered to answer questions via email, or at most answer questions in person, so long as he is given the questions in advance of the meeting.


----------



## Raheem (Jul 3, 2020)

8ball said:


> Is that not a correct usage?  Got an inkling I've read similar various places.


You might have seen it, but think it's bad grammar. Which for things, who (or whom) for people.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 3, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Dredging through the murk of His Royal Nonceness's bullshit, it seems that he has offered to answer questions via email, or at most answer questions in person, so long as he is given the questions in advance of the meeting.


bet he was like this with exams at school too


----------



## 8ball (Jul 3, 2020)

Raheem said:


> You might have seen it, but think it's bad grammar. Which for things, who (or whom) for people.



Fair enough, I wouldn't have picked up on this myself as an example of the Daily Mail's awfulness.
Though there is plenty more to choose from.


----------



## Idris2002 (Jul 3, 2020)

Self-pwnage, the tragedy of our times:


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 3, 2020)

Seems that she has a French passport, surprised she didn’t decamp over there, Polanski style.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 3, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Seems that she has a French passport, surprised she didn’t decamp over there, Polanski style.


and for similar reasons


----------



## Raheem (Jul 3, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Seems that she has a French passport, surprised she didn’t decamp over there, Polanski style.


Maybe Polanski's advantage was not having committed any crimes in France.


----------



## petee (Jul 3, 2020)

_The home was bought last December by a “legal entity” created after the homeowner’s real estate agent balked at selling to an anonymous buyer, the agent said. _









						Accused Jeffrey Epstein sex crimes accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell arrested at $1 million New Hampshire home
					

Ghislaine Maxwell, an alleged procurer for dead sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, was arrested at a 156-acre property in New Hampshire. Epstein is a former friend of Presidents Donald Trump and Bill Clinton.




					www.cnbc.com


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 3, 2020)

petee said:


> _The home was bought last December by a “legal entity” created after the homeowner’s real estate agent balked at selling to an anonymous buyer, the agent said. _
> 
> 
> 
> ...



156 acre estate for one million dollars? 

Let's move to New Hampshire.


----------



## petee (Jul 3, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> 156 acre estate for one million dollars?
> 
> Let's move to New Hampshire.



yeh, the (ex-)wife and i looked at places, some off-the-grid, but with 100s of acres for 5 figures. seriously.
but in winter, you're hosed.


----------



## pesh (Jul 3, 2020)

petee said:


> _The home was bought last December by a “legal entity” created after the homeowner’s real estate agent balked at selling to an anonymous buyer, the agent said. _
> 
> 
> 
> ...





> Other records show the buyer was Granite Reality LLC, whose listed manager is a Boston lawyer named Jeffrey Roberts.
> 
> Roberts did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The web site of his firm, Nutter McClennen & Fish, says that Roberts* ”*chairs Nutter’s Private Client Department and serves as a member of the firm’s Executive Committee.”


Nutter McClennen & Fish is a hell of a name


----------



## petee (Jul 3, 2020)

"all-cash deal"

_When Ghislaine Maxwell was buying a home in New England while federal prosecutors investigated her involvement with Jeffrey Epstein's sex crimes against young girls, she reportedly had inquired about flight patterns over the massive escape property.

According to the Daily Beast, Maxwell's Bradford, New Hampshire home was purchased in an all-cash deal in December_









						Ghislaine Maxwell Reportedly Wanted To Know Flight Patterns Over Massive NH Hideaway Property She Bought Last Year
					

"She wanted to know what the flight patterns were over the house, which was very strange," a broker told the Daily Beast.



					gothamist.com
				




tbf i hate debt and don't buy anything i can't pay for.
but i think her motives were different ...


----------



## Badgers (Jul 3, 2020)

Telegraph (paywall) 



> Ghislaine Maxwell will “never” offer any about the Duke of York as part of a plea deal, one of her closest confidantes has revealed.
> 
> As a new photograph on Friday night emergedof the socialite sitting in the Throne Room at Buckingham Palace, Laura Goldman, who has been friends with Ms Maxwell for several years, told The Telegraph she would “never sell out” Prince Andrew.











						Exclusive: Ghislaine Maxwell 'won't sell Prince Andrew out'
					

Socialite will never offer information on the Duke of York as part of a plea deal, insists one of her closest friends




					www.telegraph.co.uk


----------



## Flavour (Jul 3, 2020)

Presumably because there's offers of help if she doesn't sing and/or threats of death if she does


----------



## Celyn (Jul 3, 2020)

I thought the official line was that Andrew never never ever did anything that would be worth talking about.


----------



## mx wcfc (Jul 3, 2020)

Badgers said:


> Telegraph (paywall)
> 
> 
> 
> ...


hahahahha - wait till she's threatened with a 30 year stretch.  I am really looking forward to this, once she's done the plea bargaining.  It won't just be Prince what's his face the Spare.  There's a lot of big names losing sleep tonight!


----------



## two sheds (Jul 3, 2020)

Badgers said:


> Telegraph (paywall)
> 
> 
> 
> ...



So she's saying he's done stuff, but she won't say what it is?


----------



## mx wcfc (Jul 4, 2020)

two sheds said:


> So she's saying he's done stuff, but she won't say what it is?


It is clearly a click bait headline - some vague acquaintance of hers has got a fee for a couple of quotes - that's all.  Why would she protect him if it means she spends 25 years in a US prison?  

OK, she might name enough other names to buy a shorter stretch, but there's no way she can leave him out of it altogether.  

At risk of repeating myself, (again) swap him for the american woman who killed that guy near a US base.


----------



## Raheem (Jul 4, 2020)

Reckon the deal they will present to her will be: "Please don't say anything awkward about Prince Andrew."


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 4, 2020)

two sheds said:


> So she's saying he's done stuff, but she won't say what it is?


She's saying her life's not worth a red cent if she blabs cos the Duke of Edinburgh will arrange for her to have an 'accident' like her dad did


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 4, 2020)

mx wcfc said:


> At risk of repeating myself, (again) swap him for the american woman who killed that guy near a US base.


Nah, we’re using Assange for that.


----------



## Sprocket. (Jul 4, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> She's saying her life's not worth a red cent if she blabs cos the Duke of Edinburgh will arrange for her to have an 'accident' like her dad did


I suppose they are all in the same boat.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Jul 4, 2020)

two sheds said:


> So she's saying he's done stuff, but she won't say what it is?


----------



## krtek a houby (Jul 4, 2020)

S☼I said:


> View attachment 220771



Christ, is David Starkey in the ring as well?


----------



## newbie (Jul 4, 2020)

mx wcfc said:


> Why would she protect him if it means she spends 25 years in a US prison?


Maybe it's lockdown related, but I'm surprised she's stayed in the US at all.  She must have known she was at risk from the well publicised investigation there, whereas here she could have become pretty obscure and coat-tailed the protection the FCO is giving her mate.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Jul 4, 2020)

I have never met Prince Andrew, says Queen
					

THE Queen has issued an official statement denying that she has ever met disgraced former trade envoy Prince Andrew.




					www.thedailymash.co.uk


----------



## Wilf (Jul 4, 2020)

Raheem said:


> Reckon the deal they will present to her will be: "Please don't say anything awkward about Prince Andrew."


Yep, I'd have thought that would be the political reality of the situation. Hard to say what the political reality is in a geopolitical world of trump, pandemics and all sorts of other shit, but I doubt either government wants windsor going anywhere near a courtroom or an extradition warrant. Of course Arid Extra Dry will have done everything he can to piss them off with attempts to spin his non-compliance, but not quite enough for them to pursue him full on.


----------



## Marty1 (Jul 5, 2020)

Ghislaine Maxwell’s arrest is just the beginning of bringing many others involved to justice as far as the victims of their abuse are concerned.


----------



## Marty1 (Jul 5, 2020)

> Florida-based Kuvin represents several women who claim Epstein sexually assaulted and raped them when they were teens.
> 
> He told DailyMail.com: ‘I don’t think she is going to get out of jail alive. I said the same thing about Jeffrey Epstein and people laughed at me.
> 
> ‘I think she knows way too much information — I just have this gut feeling.











						REVEALED: New Hampshire county jail where Ghislaine Maxwell is
					

Spencer Kuvin told DailyMail.com in an exclusive interview that Maxwell 'knows too much' and that powerful people may want to silence her even as she is locked up.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




If she dies in prison then the victims won’t get justice and a lot of alleged perpetrators would breath easy.


----------



## Flavour (Jul 5, 2020)

Can you not link to daily mail please


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 5, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> If she dies in prison then the victims won’t get justice and a lot of alleged perpetrators would breath easy.


define 'justice'


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 5, 2020)

Flavour said:


> Can you not link to daily mail please


tbh the links to the dm are the least objectionable aspects of marty1's posts


----------



## teqniq (Jul 5, 2020)

Ghislaine Maxwell has tested positive for COVID-19 in New Hampshire jail, DOJ reports


----------



## Idris2002 (Jul 5, 2020)

I think that's a satire site, teqniq


----------



## equationgirl (Jul 5, 2020)

teqniq said:


> Ghislaine Maxwell has tested positive for COVID-19 in New Hampshire jail, DOJ reports


I take issue with sentence 'once she was in jail and began to relax...'. who relaxes after a federal arrest?

Certainly reads like satire Idris2002


----------



## teqniq (Jul 5, 2020)

Idris2002 said:


> I think that's a satire site, teqniq


I did wonder.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 5, 2020)

teqniq said:


> I did wonder.



You should have checked the 'about us' page - "This is an entertainment website written to satirize news events,"


----------



## Marty1 (Jul 5, 2020)

teqniq said:


> I did wonder.



Tbf it’s hard to tell these days.


----------



## equationgirl (Jul 5, 2020)

Yeah, the line between satire and reality is pretty blurred these days.


----------



## MrSki (Jul 5, 2020)




----------



## colacubes (Jul 5, 2020)

MrSki said:


>


That’s obviously fake.


----------



## teqniq (Jul 5, 2020)

Yes, even I can tell.


----------



## MrSki (Jul 5, 2020)

colacubes said:


> That’s obviously fake.


Yes I know. I posted it after the story had been discredited & coming from a parody/satire account. The ten odd posts before were pointing this out.


----------



## colacubes (Jul 5, 2020)

MrSki said:


> Yes I know. I posted it after the story had been discredited & coming from a parody/satire account. The ten odd posts before were pointing this out.


7 posts. But why bother adding another fake thing to the mix? It just propagates this bullshit.


----------



## MrSki (Jul 5, 2020)

colacubes said:


> 7 posts. But why bother adding another fake thing to the mix? It just propagates this bullshit.


I would have thought the "Oh shit that is happening tomorrow" might have been a bit of a clue that it was fake. Sorry I thought it was obvious & there was not a need to spell it out.


----------



## killer b (Jul 5, 2020)

it's probably ok to post obviously satirical bits without worrying about 'adding fake things to the mix' tbf


----------



## colacubes (Jul 5, 2020)

Yeah it probably is and I’m probably having a bad day and a sense of humour failure. But you know stuff about sexual abuse, rape and the like does that sometimes and occasionally the lols can be difficult to find. So sorry not sorry.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 7, 2020)

teqniq said:


> Ghislaine Maxwell has tested positive for COVID-19 in New Hampshire jail, DOJ reports



By all accounts this, together with a mocked-up BBC News web-page, has set the conspiracy loons off.  



> The story first appeared on July 3 on brownvalleyobserver.com, under the headline, “Ghislaine Maxwell has tested positive for COVID-19 in New Hampshire jail, DOJ reports.” The story was shared more than 17,000 times on Facebook, according to CrowdTangle analytics data.
> 
> The website’s disclaimer, however, describes it as an “entertainment website written to satirize news events, politics, and popular faces and ideas, and to provide commentary on social attitudes and trends.” But the claim has spread without that disclaimer, including in the form of a viral screenshot showing the headline with a Twitter comment seemingly suggesting Maxwell was going to be killed.
> 
> A similar claim was also advanced in an image made to look like a screenshot of a news story from the BBC; the headline said Maxwell was “moved to intensive care as Coronavirus symptoms worsen.” The news organization did not report that story, and the date is listed as “11 July 2020” — which is still days away.














						Officials Didn't Say Epstein Associate Has COVID-19 - FactCheck.org
					

Social media posts falsely assert that Ghislaine Maxwell -- the recently arrested associate of Jeffrey Epstein -- has tested positive for COVID-19 in jail. The story is the product of a website that says its work is satire.




					www.factcheck.org


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 17, 2020)

Warning: The following is not real, repeat, it is not a real news report...









						Pizza Express to shut down more than seventy-five sex offender alibis
					

UK nonces are reeling from the news that one of their favourite hangouts is to close more than seventy of its venues.




					newsthump.com
				





*UK nonces are reeling from the news that one of their favourite hangouts is to close more than seventy of its venues.*

The restaurant chain is embarking on an insolvency process, allowing it to exit stores, cut rents and refuse further bookings from men with a van load of cute puppies.

Pizza Express has been a favourite on the British High Street since 1965, charging its principle demographic of lower-middle-class sex offenders an aspirational £4.95 for a mixed leaf salad.

Despite the recent easing of the lockdown, the business has been hit by enforced closures, stronger competition and people desperately hoping not to have their lunch ruined by being sat next to the less-desirable members of the Royal Family.

Former customer Tracy Fowler told us, “I quite like Pizza Express, and I’ll be sad to see them go – but honestly, who wants to risk having Prince Andrew in your eye-line when you’re trying to enjoy a Sloppy Giuseppe?”

The news will leave suspected British child molesters with a severe shortage of explanations as to their whereabouts on that awkward ‘night in question’, though experts predict that Pizza Hut and Pret A Manger are expected to pick up some of the slack.

Pizza Express spokesman, Simon Williams, told us, “We’re hoping to win back customers with the launch of our new Deep Pan ‘Spicy Epstein’.

He added, “It’s guaranteed to leave a very unpleasant taste in your mouth.

“As soon as it’s ready, we just leave it hanging around waiting for it to go cold.”


----------



## Orang Utan (Jul 20, 2020)

One of the judges overseeing an investigation into Epstein’s finances was attacked today by a hitman who killed her son and critically injured her husband. The assassin has conveniently been killed too. 








						Gunman kills son and wounds husband of US judge - BBC News
					

An attacker dressed as a FedEx driver is sought after the shooting at the home of judge Esther Salas.




					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 20, 2020)

Orang Utan said:


> One of the judges overseeing an investigation into Epstein’s finances was attacked today by a hitman who killed her son and critically injured her husband. The assassin has conveniently been killed too.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That link doesn’t mention Epstein and says the attacker is still at large


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 20, 2020)

Orang Utan said:


> The assassin has conveniently been killed too.



What?   

From your link...



> According to reports the attacker was dressed as a FedEx delivery driver and is still at large.
> 
> In a statement, the FBI said it was looking for one suspect and asked anyone who thought they might have relevant information to call them.


----------



## two sheds (Jul 20, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> That link doesn’t mention Epstein and says the attacker is still at large



Orang Utan _knows something _


----------



## belboid (Jul 20, 2020)

CNN report both things ou said, tho there’s is a very early report which seems to be a bit outdated. 









						Attorney who was found dead named as primary suspect in fatal shooting at federal judge's home
					

The man suspected of shooting the husband and son of US District Judge Esther Salas on Sunday at her North Brunswick, New Jersey, home has been identified as Roy Den Hollander, the US Attorney's Office in New Jersey announced in a release Monday afternoon.




					www.cnn.com


----------



## Orang Utan (Jul 20, 2020)

Aye, other news networks


----------



## Orang Utan (Jul 20, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> What?
> 
> From your link...


Have a look about


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 20, 2020)

Orang Utan said:


> Have a look about



Why should I? 

If you want to make a claim, post a link that confirms it, not one that says the fucking opposite, you muppet.


----------



## petee (Jul 20, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> That link doesn’t mention Epstein and says the attacker is still at large



guy's dead now.

_Earlier Monday, unidentified officials told ABC News that an attorney who had a case before Salas in 2015 had been found dead near Liberty, New York, of what appeared to be a self-inflicted wound. The news network reported a FedEx package addressed to the judge was also found in the attorney’s vehicle. _









						Authorities identify deceased attorney as ‘primary suspect’ in fatal shooting at judge’s home
					

The son of U.S. District Judge Esther Salas is dead and her husband injured after a gunman dressed as a delivery driver shot them at the family’s New Jersey home Sunday, officials said.




					www.kiro7.com
				




e2a other sources say he argued before that judge more than once.


----------



## NoXion (Jul 20, 2020)

So the gunman was not just some disposable flunkey, but was an attorney? What the fuck?


----------



## Orang Utan (Jul 20, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> Why should I?
> 
> If you want to make a claim, post a link that confirms it, not one that says the fucking opposite, you muppet.


Cos you might remain confused. 
I only wanted to quote the bbc not the other less reputable news sites so added the info that wasn't in the beeb article


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 20, 2020)

Orang Utan said:


> Cos you might remain confused.
> I only wanted to quote the bbc not the other less reputable news sites so added the info that wasn't in the beeb article



Yeah, always best to link to an article reporting exactly the opposite to what you are posting, brilliant.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jul 20, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> Yeah, always best to link to an article reporting exactly the opposite to what you are posting, brilliant.


i'm not a journalism mate. no skin off my nose if you dont want to rely on a random loudmouth down the pub for your news. be my guest.
if you do want to rely on a random loudmouth down the pub for your news, the more fool you.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 20, 2020)

Orang Utan said:


> i'm not a journalism mate. no skin off my nose if you dont want to rely on a random loudmouth down the pub for your news. be my guest.
> if you do want to rely on a random loudmouth down the pub for your news, the more fool you.



Are you drunk? 

You posted a link, which clearly you hadn't bothered to actually read, which totally contradicted what you were posting about, that's your mistake, get over it.


----------



## petee (Jul 20, 2020)

Dead ‘Men's Rights' Attorney Eyed in Shootings of NJ Federal Judge's Son, Husband: FBI
					

The husband and son of a New Jersey federal judge were shot at their home Sunday afternoon, and a massive law enforcement response is underway.




					www.nbcnewyork.com
				




_And now authorities are also looking into his possible connection to the death of another prominent men's rights figure in California earlier this month, sources sa_y


----------



## Orang Utan (Jul 20, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> Are you drunk?
> 
> You posted a link, which clearly you hadn't bothered to actually read, which totally contradicted what you were posting about, that's your mistake, get over it.


No.
And, no, I read several articles, one of which was the BBC one. What did you do? Overheard a bloke in the pub,


----------



## Marty1 (Jul 20, 2020)

GM thinks Epstein was murdered and fears shes next:



Spoiler: Warning - Fox article!












						Ghislaine Maxwell fears for her life, believes she might meet the same fate as Jeffrey Epstein: report
					

Ghislaine Maxwell, the former girlfriend of disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein, believes the convicted pedophile was murdered while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges and fears the same end, according to a friend.




					www.foxnews.com


----------



## keybored (Jul 20, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> GM thinks Epstein was murdered and fears shes next:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


"according to a friend" always raises an eyebrow but in relation to Ghislaine it's pure laughable.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 20, 2020)

Orang Utan said:


> i'm not a journalism mate. no skin off my nose if you dont want to rely on a random loudmouth down the pub for your news. be my guest.
> if you do want to rely on a random loudmouth down the pub for your news, the more fool you.


TBF you're writing like you've been subbed for the _Graun_


----------



## Dogsauce (Jul 21, 2020)

petee said:


> Dead ‘Men's Rights' Attorney Eyed in Shootings of NJ Federal Judge's Son, Husband: FBI
> 
> 
> The husband and son of a New Jersey federal judge were shot at their home Sunday afternoon, and a massive law enforcement response is underway.
> ...



Also:



> Den Hollander previously sued multiple anchors and reporters from NBC News and other networks, alleging they engaged in an illegal conspiracy to prevent Donald Trump's election to the presidency.)



If Trump loses I can see more of these cry-babies kicking off about it.


----------



## Aladdin (Jul 24, 2020)

'I wish her well': Donald Trump on Ghislaine Maxwell – video
					

Donald Trump has said he wishes  well Ghislaine Maxwell, who currently faces federal charges for allegedly enabling the disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein’s sex trafficking of minor girls.




					www.theguardian.com
				




And Trump asked about G Maxwell says... "I wish her well"
Is that code for "keep your mouth shut and you'll be fine"?


----------



## T & P (Jul 31, 2020)

So far I can only find this story in the Torygraph behind a paywall, but the headline tells you everything you need to know...









						Prince Andrew did not press US government for 'favourable' deal for Epstein, insist friends
					

The Duke is accused of trying to persuade authorities to give Epstein a sweetheart deal in his underage prostitution case




					www.telegraph.co.uk
				




Just when you thought the man couldn't be anymore of a cunt...


----------



## andysays (Jul 31, 2020)

the BBC website currently has a story about Maxwell, including the fact that Epstein sent her emails in 2015 saying she'd done nothing wrong.

So that clears that up then.

(the point of the story is actually that it disproves her claim she hadn't discussed things with him)


----------



## Raheem (Jul 31, 2020)

Sugar Kane said:


> And Trump asked about G Maxwell says... "I wish her well"
> Is that code for "keep your mouth shut and you'll be fine"?


Or maybe getting it on the record that he wishes her no harm, for future reference.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 31, 2020)

Raheem said:


> Or maybe getting it on the record that he wishes her no harm, for future reference.


Yeh he'll go all Bart Simpson when she gets rubbed out


----------



## Wilf (Jul 31, 2020)

With all these accusations swirling around, andrew probably needs to do an interview to clear his name. Emily Maitlis might be free?


----------



## Raheem (Jul 31, 2020)

Wilf said:


> andrew probably needs to do an interview to clear his name


...of the bits before "Andrew".


----------



## MickiQ (Jul 31, 2020)

Sugar Kane said:


> 'I wish her well': Donald Trump on Ghislaine Maxwell – video
> 
> 
> Donald Trump has said he wishes  well Ghislaine Maxwell, who currently faces federal charges for allegedly enabling the disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein’s sex trafficking of minor girls.
> ...


I don't think so Trump would just say "Keep your mouth shut or I will have you assassinated" then he would go on to deny he ever met any woman that Maxwell might suggest he might have met and even if he did he didn't do anything wrong.
The possibility that He Who Cannot Sweat might have lobbied on Epstein's behalf several years after he claimed to have last seen him is very interesting though since it implies that HWCS knew or suspected (which he flat out denied) that Epstein was a bad un.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 31, 2020)

'It was just a shooting party'.


----------



## Sprocket. (Jul 31, 2020)

Sugar Kane said:


> 'I wish her well': Donald Trump on Ghislaine Maxwell – video
> 
> 
> Donald Trump has said he wishes  well Ghislaine Maxwell, who currently faces federal charges for allegedly enabling the disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein’s sex trafficking of minor girls.
> ...


It means he wishes she would fall down one!


----------



## Celyn (Jul 31, 2020)

T & P said:


> So far I can only find this story in the Torygraph behind a paywall, but the headline tells you everything you need to know...
> 
> ...


I think there's a couple of free pages per month or something. I'll see whether copy and paste works.



> Prince Andrew allegedly lobbied the US government on Jeffrey Epstein’s behalf for a "favourable" plea deal in a underage prostitution case in Florida in 2008, it has been claimed in newly unsealed court documents.
> The trove of documents, published for the first time after an appeal to keep them secret by Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell’s lawyers was rejected this week, highlights the relationship between the Duke and the disgraced late financier.
> They are part of a 2015 civil lawsuit brought against Epstein and Ms Maxwell, 58, by Viriginia Roberts Giuffre, who claims she was forced by the millionaire to sleep with Prince Andrew and others when she was 17.
> The Duke has strenuously denied Ms Giuffre’s allegations.
> ...


----------



## Celyn (Jul 31, 2020)

Raheem said:


> ...of the bits before "Andrew".


De-princify him?  I don't think "prince" is a title award for being of good character. I think it's inherited or something.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 31, 2020)

She didn’t do it 
She wouldn’t dare 
She didn’t want it 
She wasn’t there


----------



## equationgirl (Jul 31, 2020)

Disgraceful of Andrew to have lobbied in this way.


----------



## ska invita (Jul 31, 2020)

https://www.newsweek.com/bill-clinton-went-jeffrey-epsteins-island-2-young-girls-virginia-giuffre-says-1521845
		


11 flights in the log book for Bill Clinton supposedly.... excuse the newsweak link


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jul 31, 2020)

ska invita said:


> https://www.newsweek.com/bill-clinton-went-jeffrey-epsteins-island-2-young-girls-virginia-giuffre-says-1521845
> 
> 
> 
> 11 flights in the log book for Bill Clinton supposedly.... excuse the newsweak link


----------



## brogdale (Jul 31, 2020)

> The sex offender Jeffrey Epstein allegedly tried to gather incriminating material against Prince Andrew by forcing an underage girl to have sex with him, according to newly released court documents.
> 
> The papers released by a court in New York say the alleged encounter took place on the late US financier’s private island in the US Virgin Islands. A document claims Epstein instructed the girl, referred to as Jane Doe #3, to “give the prince whatever he demanded and report back to him on the details of the sexual abuse”.


Guardian


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 31, 2020)

Paedo Island is in the US Virgin Islands, age of consent there is 18.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 31, 2020)

Is Andy sweating yet?


----------



## brogdale (Jul 31, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Paedo Island is in the US Virgin Islands, age of consent there is 18.


Does that alter things?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 31, 2020)

Just a statement of fact, many feel that cos Roberts was 17 it gives HRH a pass. Not in the USVI it doesn’t, nor in the U.K. if she is trafficked for prostitution.


----------



## brogdale (Jul 31, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Just a statement of fact, many feel that cos Roberts was 17 it gives HRH a pass. Not in the USVI it doesn’t, nor in the U.K. if she is trafficked for prostitution.


Bound to be younger victims of his abuse when/if the facts emerge.


----------



## weltweit (Jul 31, 2020)

I have a feeling there are going to be quite a lot of prominent names cropping up in this case.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 31, 2020)

transporting young uns across borders for sex is really bad vuggum in the USA- this could explode (hopefully)

using the youngsters transported is just as bad- if it can be proved that no sweat andy did have sex with one of them, then hes going down for a long time (hopefully)









						18 U.S. Code § 2423 -  Transportation of minors
					






					www.law.cornell.edu
				




irrespective of HRH , still cannot get my head around a grown man actually participating in such things, does my head in


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 31, 2020)

not-bono-ever said:


> irrespective of HRH , still cannot get my head around a grown man actually participating in such things, does my head in



This is a man who has had the world handed to him on a plate, not surprising that a man who has lived with servants at his beck and call, plus spooks shadowing his every move doesn’t remember just another body sent his way to service his desires. Ffs, he and his ‘team’ genuinely thought the Maitlis interview went well. They are all living on another sodding planet.


----------



## Celyn (Jul 31, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> ...They are all living on another sodding planet.


If only!     

((( other planet )))


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 31, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> This is a man who has had the world handed to him on a plate, not surprising that a man who has lived with servants at his beck and call, plus spooks shadowing his every move doesn’t remember just another body sent his way to service his desires. Ffs, he and his ‘team’ genuinely thought the Maitlis interview went well. They are all living on another sodding planet.



I know, but this isnt like copping off at ritzy at 1.45 Am when the commodores comes on. Its totally immoral.  still cannot comprehend it
meh


----------



## Flavour (Jul 31, 2020)

He's so fucked. Total disgraced, the rest of the royals must be fucking dying inside, this is the worst PR they've had since Diana died. Its great.keep it coming. Can't get enough of weirdly worded statements from the (formerly or soon to be formerly) rich and powerful


----------



## Celyn (Jul 31, 2020)

weltweit said:


> I have a feeling there are going to be quite a lot of prominent names cropping up in this case.


I agree, but probably some cropping up and being roundly defended by friends all singing in fine chorus "but he would never do a thing like that".

Also, likely some names that turn up but only in a very quiet way and then to be hushed up quickly. Quickly to the power of VERY.


----------



## Bwark (Jul 31, 2020)

What bothers me the most is that things like this are only really recently becoming "big news". What a shame no one came out at the time Jimmy Saville was everybody's favourite person and a blind eye was turned. Many years later more and more people are showed up to be cockroaches on humanity and everyone who was there at the time pretends to be astounded. Sickening


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 31, 2020)

from the guardian article- an allegation at this stage but..

" A friend of Prince Andrew said: “The US federal appeals court said in 2019 these allegations should be treated with ‘extreme caution’. Allegations are not the same as facts, which is the essential premise on which justice works. Let’s see if these allegations stand up, because precious few about the duke do – where’s the proof?” "

i.e. yeah  but wacha gonna do about it ?


----------



## petee (Jul 31, 2020)

not-bono-ever said:


> transporting young uns across borders for sex is really bad vuggum in the USA- this could explode (hopefully)
> 
> using the youngsters transported is just as bad- if it can be proved that no sweat andy did have sex with one of them, then hes going down for a long time (hopefully)
> 
> ...



known as the Mann Act








						Mann Act - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org


----------



## krtek a houby (Jul 31, 2020)

Hopefully a nail in the coffin for all the royal parasites.


----------



## MrSki (Aug 1, 2020)




----------



## MrSki (Aug 1, 2020)

This thread could be worth watching.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Aug 1, 2020)




----------



## two sheds (Aug 1, 2020)

I liked it last time, seems churlish not to like it again


----------



## MrSpikey (Aug 1, 2020)

Celyn said:


> De-princify him?  I don't think "prince" is a title award for being of good character. I think it's inherited or something.



Following established precedent, I believe he could be renamed The Andrew Formerly Known As Prince.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 2, 2020)

Somebody help me out here: I can see that the release of the court papers will greatly worry windsor and the details provide context in terms of maxwell's grooming of the girls. But do they provide any further evidence or testimony or is it really another retelling of Giuffre's own evidence?  I might add that I believe her entirely, even if there may be a bit haziness around dates (not unexpected given the situation she was in). I'm just wondering whether it actually puts him anywhere nearer to an interview room, never mind a court room?

A random thought: not going to happen, but could he be prosecuted for sex tourism? Giuffre herself may not have been under UK age of consent, but was trafficked. But the other abused girls at the 'orgy' on paedo island included were reported to be under age.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 2, 2020)

Wilf said:


> Somebody help me out here: I can see that the release of the court papers will greatly worry windsor and the details provide context in terms of maxwell's grooming of the girls. But do they provide any further evidence or testimony or is it really another retelling of Giuffre's own evidence?  I might add that I believe her entirely, even if there may be a bit haziness around dates (not unexpected given the situation she was in). I'm just wondering whether it actually puts him anywhere nearer to an interview room, never mind a court room?
> 
> A random thought: not going to happen, but could he be prosecuted for sex tourism? Giuffre herself may not have been under UK age of consent, but was trafficked. But the other abused girls at the 'orgy' on paedo island included were reported to be under age.



Perhaps at some point between now and her trial in twelve months time it may dawn on her that she is fucked. Last week she tried some sneaky manoeuvre that was no doubt advocated by her lawyers and it was spat out without a seconds thought by the courts. At some point, unless she is thicker than the thickest of pig shit she will understand that once the US decides to go for you, they will get you unless you are whiter than white (not just skin colour) and can prove it. At some point she may think that spending all but the very last years of her life in prison is not something she fancies very much and that spilling her guts on who did what and when may be a good way of substantially reducing the number of those years. Right now, perhaps her arrogance may make her think protecting her powerful mates is the way forward, that view may well change when it dawns on her that the choices are life without the privileges of powerful mates vs prison until late 80’s...


----------



## Wilf (Aug 2, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Perhaps at some point between now and her trial in twelve months time it may dawn on her that she is fucked. Last week she tried some sneaky manoeuvre that was no doubt advocated by her lawyers and it was spat out without a seconds thought by the courts. At some point, unless she is thicker than the thickest of pig shit she will understand that once the US decides to go for you, they will get you unless you are whiter than white (not just skin colour) and can prove it. At some point she may think that spending all but the very last years of her life in prison is not something she fancies very much and that spilling her guts on who did what and when may be a good way of substantially reducing the number of those years. Right now, perhaps her arrogance may make her think protecting her powerful mates is the way forward, that view may well change when it dawns on her that the choices are life without the privileges of powerful mates vs prison until late 80’s...


Thanks. 
On a slightly different point, does going in hard on maxwell/windsor mean also going after alan dershovitz? The evidence is different against him - for example he wasn't there at Tramp's - but if Giuffre is credible on one she surely is on the other.  Dershovitz would be a major headache for any prosecution team willing to take him on, not just his aggressive counter tactics but also his connections. Very messy.

Anyway, fuck the lot of them, fucking nonces.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 2, 2020)

I have no idea about all the other sleezebags involved with Epstein, but it seems that Maxwell is in it up to her neck and that grassing is the only way to avoid the rest of her meaningful life in stir.

know nothing much about her either, but she seems to appear with a creepy smile in the background of a lot of pictures with sleezebags, always in the background, always with a smirk...


----------



## andysays (Aug 4, 2020)

Not looking good for the grand old Duke

Woman claims she saw Prince Andrew with Ghislaine Maxwell and Virginia Giuffre on ‘Woking Pizza Express’ night

Prince Andrew was 'at club dancing with accuser not Pizza Express', claims witness


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 4, 2020)

andysays said:


> Not looking good for the grand old Duke
> 
> Woman claims she saw Prince Andrew with Ghislaine Maxwell and Virginia Giuffre on ‘Woking Pizza Express’ night
> 
> Prince Andrew was 'at club dancing with accuser not Pizza Express', claims witness


I'm fairly certain that the only person on the planet who might even remotely believe the Woking Pizza Express story is his mum Brenda
Derailing the thread slightly Pizza Express have announced they are closing about 60 outlets, one wonders if the Royal one is amongst them


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Aug 4, 2020)

MickiQ said:


> I'm fairly certain that the only person on the planet who might even remotely believe the Woking Pizza Express story is his mum Brenda
> Derailing the thread slightly Pizza Express have announced they are closing about 60 outlets, one wonders if the Royal one is amongst them


I don't think Brenda is that stupid.


----------



## Sprocket. (Aug 4, 2020)

MrSpikey said:


> Following established precedent, I believe he could be renamed The Andrew Formerly Known As yet another spare.


FIFY


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Aug 4, 2020)

andysays said:


> Not looking good for the grand old Duke
> 
> Woman claims she saw Prince Andrew with Ghislaine Maxwell and Virginia Giuffre on ‘Woking Pizza Express’ night
> 
> Prince Andrew was 'at club dancing with accuser not Pizza Express', claims witness


Disgusting how the Mirror refer to him as "disgraced American financier" and her as "British socialite". It feels like they are still looking up to them as important and special people.


----------



## andysays (Aug 4, 2020)

MickiQ said:


> I'm fairly certain that the only person on the planet who might even remotely believe the Woking Pizza Express story is his mum Brenda
> Derailing the thread slightly Pizza Express have announced they are closing about 60 outlets, one wonders if the Royal one is amongst them


I actually discovered this story after spotting today's _other_ Pizza Express story and googling "Prince Andrew Pizza Express" to remind myself of which branch he'd claimed he was in, so I could check if that was one of the ones to close.


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 4, 2020)

Mrs Miggins said:


> Disgusting how the Mirror refer to him as "disgraced American financier" and her as "British socialite". It feels like they are still looking up to them as important and special people.


Ironically in the middle of the Mirror article is a box to put your email in to receive 'royal' news straight to your inbox. To further add to the irony the picture attached it is one of his daughters (I can never remember which one is which) on her wedding day.
Whilst otherwise of firm republican leanings, I am starting to feel sorry for his daughters.


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Aug 4, 2020)

MickiQ said:


> Ironically in the middle of the Mirror article is a box to put your email in to receive 'royal' news straight to your inbox. To further add to the irony the picture attached it is one of his daughters (I can never remember which one is which) on her wedding day.
> Whilst otherwise of firm republican leanings, I am starting to feel sorry for his daughters.


I'm not. Fuck the lot of them.


----------



## Argonia (Aug 4, 2020)

Hear hear Miggins


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 4, 2020)

Yeah, Beatrice and Eugenie were roughly the same age as Virginia Guiffre when she met Andrew, he used that fact to try to make conversation with her in the nightclub where he was absolutely not sweating.

Also, not sure the age of consent stuff is helpful to the debate. These young women were sex trafficked and raped. That's it.


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Aug 4, 2020)

equationgirl said:


> Yeah, Beatrice and Eugenie were roughly the same age as Virginia Guiffre when she met Andrew, he used that fact to try to make conversation with her in the nightclub where he was absolutely not sweating.
> 
> Also, not sure the age of consent stuff is helpful to the debate. These young women were sex trafficked and raped. That's it.


Precisely


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 4, 2020)

It is perfectly possible to be at Pizza Express in Woking at 5pm and at Tramp at midnight. Woking to Waterloo is 27 minutes, Tramp is less than 15 minutes walk from Waterloo...


----------



## brogdale (Aug 4, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> It is perfectly possible to be at Pizza Express in Woking at 5pm and at Tramp at midnight. Working to Waterloo is 27 minutes, Tramp is less than 15 minutes walk from Waterloo...


No sweat.


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 4, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> It is perfectly possible to be at Pizza Express in Woking at 5pm and at Tramp at midnight. Working to Waterloo is 27 minutes, Tramp is less than 15 minutes walk from Waterloo...


Interesting...

I won't ask how you know this.


----------



## Marty1 (Aug 19, 2020)

New photos of Bill Clinton with one of Epstein’s young victims released:









						Bill Clinton receives neck massage from Jeffrey Epstein victim
					

Bill Clinton is seen in photos sitting comfortably and smiling as Chauntae Davies, 22, rubs her hands into his shoulders. They were on a trip with Jeffrey Epstein to Africa in September of 2002.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## krtek a houby (Aug 20, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> New photos of Bill Clinton with one of Epstein’s young victims released:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Not going to click on that fucking link. What's the gist of it?


----------



## belboid (Aug 20, 2020)

krtek a houby said:


> Not going to click on that fucking link. What's the gist of it?


I think the bits you can read without clicking on it covers the essentials.  

but it’s Marty, so who gives a fuck?


----------



## two sheds (Aug 20, 2020)

devastating - Clinton's been a hero on urban and a personal inspiration for me for as long as I can remember. True anti-capitalist, marty's got us with this one


----------



## DaveCinzano (Aug 20, 2020)

krtek a houby said:


> Not going to click on that fucking link. What's the gist of it?





> Davies acted as an air stewardess on the flight and described being shocked when Clinton boarded the plane, saying he was 'charming and sweet'.
> 
> Davies, now in her early 40s, said of the massage pictures: 'Although the image looks bizarre, President Clinton was a perfect gentleman during the trip and I saw absolutely no foul play involving him.'
> 
> ...The star-studded group – which included actors Kevin Spacey and Chris Tucker – visited the countries of Ghana, Nigeria, Rwanda, Mozambique and South Africa during the five-day humanitarian trip.


----------



## freakydave (Aug 20, 2020)

two sheds said:


> devastating - Clinton's been a hero on urban and a personal inspiration for me for as long as I can remember. True anti-capitalist, marty's got us with this one



It is weird how Bill Clinton is not put in the same category as Andrew Windsor in this whole thing


----------



## krtek a houby (Aug 20, 2020)

freakydave said:


> It is weird how Bill Clinton is not put in the same category as Andrew Windsor in this whole thing



He is.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 20, 2020)

freakydave said:


> It is weird how Bill Clinton is not put in the same category as Andrew Windsor in this whole thing


He almost certainly is an abuser and has a well documented set of allegations against him, including rape. But to answer your question, even though clinton seems to have been a regular on the nonce's plane, there are no specific epstein related allegations against him (afaik).


----------



## freakydave (Aug 20, 2020)

I'm going to leave it because to be honest I strongly disagree, but when I get in arguments on here I get stressed out


----------



## 8ball (Aug 20, 2020)

freakydave said:


> I'm going to leave it because to be honest I strongly disagree, but when I get in arguments on here I get stressed out



Best not to get stressed out and remember the 39%


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 20, 2020)

I've clicked on it, there is a picture of Bill Clinton sat in an airport transit area having his neck massaged by a young woman, He later claimed nothing untoward happened, She later claimed nothing untoward happened. 
Anyone looking at those photos would assume they were completely innocent except that one was the 42nd POTUS and one was a young woman who later accused a notorious someone else of raping her.
There seems to be a subtext running through it that this makes Clintons endorsement of Biden a bad thing, I'm not sure what the Fail's angle is on this. The Overton Window in the US is WAY to the right of where it is in the UK.
Politically Biden probably sits somewhere around where Johnson is so hardly a raging leftie. Even Bernie Sanders the darling of US socialism is probably about as left wing as Tony Blair.
I don't see why the Fail wouldn't support any Democratic candidate considering the trainwreck that the Republican Party now is.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 20, 2020)

freakydave said:


> I'm going to leave it because to be honest I strongly disagree, but when I get in arguments on here I get stressed out


To be fair, I and others were (broadly) agreeing with you.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Aug 20, 2020)

freakydave said:


> It is weird how Bill Clinton is not put in the same category as Andrew Windsor in this whole thing


One is more newsworthy, but don't worry, unless a certain Maxwell dies beforehand, much more will be revealed at trial..
So take it for granted that nothing more will be revealed.


----------



## freakydave (Aug 21, 2020)

Saul Goodman said:


> One is more newsworthy, but don't worry, unless a certain Maxwell dies beforehand, much more will be revealed at trial..
> So take it for granted that nothing more will be revealed.



The Jeffery Epstein thing isn't even a big deal for most people. It was a news story around this time last year I think, and it was a big thing for a bit because it involved all of these high level people, but then the news moved on and we don't care. 

It's the same as climate change, some climate change thing comes out and we get stressed out, but then 'Donald Trump insults a female reporter' and everyone is attracted to that, the Clintons are becoming these hate figures because they are not powerful, the power did not change.

But Oh my Gosh, 'if I saw Bill Clinton giving a 22 year old woman a neckrub in an airport, I would think that it was totally innocent'. Someone said that and got likes.


----------



## krtek a houby (Aug 21, 2020)

freakydave said:


> The Jeffery Epstein thing isn't even a big deal for most people. It was a news story around this time last year I think, and it was a big thing for a bit because it involved all of these high level people, but then the news moved on and we don't care.



Reckon people care a lot. Given that the rich can seemingly avoid justice and victims are often harassed or not believed. 

Epstein dying probably denied the victims the justice they needed. Here's hoping Maxwell and the rest of them don't get away so easily.


----------



## freakydave (Aug 21, 2020)

krtek a houby said:


> Reckon people care a lot. Given that the rich can seemingly avoid justice and victims are often harassed or not believed.
> 
> Epstein dying probably denied the victims the justice they needed. Here's hoping Maxwell and the rest of them don't get away so easily.



I think that it's normalised. I mean, the Ghislaine Maxwell story, I remember the Robert Maxwell thing vaguely, brilliant guy from humble beginnings in East Europe, war hero, important to Britain and Israel, ended up in some deep dark thing and 'fell off a boat'. His daughter Ghislaine had been living an aristocrat life, the rest of the family disassociated from it, but she stayed in the game, hooked up with Epstein, got all of his money from these high ranking American capitalists and ended up in deep trouble like her dad. I think that he had a few kids and the other ones got rid of the Maxwell name and were happy being posh kids.
Epstein seems similar, very clever guy from humble beginnings who was sucked into some top level stuff and disposed of.

According to the official NYT program about Epstein that I listened to it just seemed like they were agents not actors. I get stressed out because yes, it just seems to me, like it probably seems to you that I am repeating some ant semitic agenda,

see.  i get stressed out


----------



## krtek a houby (Aug 21, 2020)

freakydave said:


> I think that it's normalised. I mean, the Ghislaine Maxwell story, I remember the Robert Maxwell thing vaguely, brilliant guy from humble beginnings in East Europe, war hero, important to Britain and Israel, ended up in some deep dark thing and 'fell off a boat'. His daughter Ghislaine had been living an aristocrat life, the rest of the family disassociated from it, but she stayed in the game, hooked up with Epstein, got all of his money from these high ranking American capitalists and ended up in deep trouble like her dad. I think that he had a few kids and the other ones got rid of the Maxwell name and were happy being posh kids.
> Epstein seems similar, very clever guy from humble beginnings who was sucked into some top level stuff and disposed of.
> 
> According to the official NYT program about Epstein that I listened to it just seemed like they were agents not actors. I get stressed out because yes, it just seems to me, like it probably seems to you that I am repeating some ant semitic agenda,
> ...



Perhaps don't be so quick to believe that these were all brilliant, clever people who happened to fall into bad situations/company.

They knew what they were doing. Crooks and abusers.


----------



## freakydave (Aug 21, 2020)

krtek a houby said:


> Perhaps don't be so quick to believe that these were all brilliant, clever people who happened to fall into bad situations/company.
> 
> They knew what they were doing. Crooks and abusers.



They were probably psychopathic, but they were obviously very intelligent and together. You must have met psychopaths before, usually it's a disability and they have awful short and violent lives, especially if they are born in poor circumstances. 

I should not have used 'brilliant' though, that was just me getting carried away with myself


----------



## freakydave (Aug 21, 2020)




----------



## MrSki (Aug 23, 2020)

The peasants are revolting.


----------



## magneze (Aug 23, 2020)

Last year apparently.


----------



## Streathamite (Aug 23, 2020)

freakydave said:


> It is weird how Bill Clinton is not put in the same category as Andrew Windsor in this whole thing


There is very little hard evidence of actual sexual abuse or any sort of sex crime being committed by him (i.e. non-consensual sexual activities). None that would stand a prayer in court, anyway.
Unfortunately, Clinton, like his wife, goes all gooey at the thought of whooping it up with seriously wealthy people


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 23, 2020)

MrSki said:


> The peasants are revolting.







Serf’s up!


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 23, 2020)

Streathamite said:


> There is very little hard evidence of actual sexual abuse or any sort of sex crime being committed by him (i.e. non-consensual sexual activities). None that would stand a prayer in court, anyway.
> Unfortunately, Clinton, like his wife, goes all gooey at the thought of whooping it up with seriously wealthy people




Clinton’s thing, much like Nonce Andrew, is getting sex off people through power, it’s what gets them off in the same way that outright rapists do, but although sleazy and shit it isn’t generally illegal. Mr No Sweat has an issue in that at least one of the pieces of meat* he satisfied his desires on was under the age on consent, further for him she is the main protagonist in all this and everyone believes her, cos what she speaks is so utterly honest and not adrenaline overdoses at seeing the bill at Pizza Express where we don’t even know where the bar is bollocks.



*his thinking


----------



## brogdale (Aug 23, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Serf’s up!


Massively high loon spud/FMOTL quotient in that lot there, I'd wager.


----------



## 8ball (Aug 23, 2020)

brogdale said:


> Massively high loon spud/FMOTL quotient in that lot there, I'd wager.



Wouldn't surprise me if that QAnon stuff is getting imported too.


----------



## Streathamite (Aug 23, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Clinton’s thing, much like Nonce Andrew, is getting sex off people through power, it’s what gets them off in the same way that outright rapists do, but although sleazy and shit it isn’t generally illegal. Mr No Sweat has an issue in that at least one of the pieces of meat* he satisfied his desires on was under the age on consent, further for him she is the main protagonist in all this and everyone believes her, cos what she speaks is so utterly honest and not adrenaline overdoses at seeing the bill at Pizza Express where we don’t even know where the bar is bollocks.
> 
> 
> 
> *his thinking


don't disagree with any of that. There's absolutely no dout bt that power is an aphrodisiac - to wit, Robin cook and John Prescott


----------



## brogdale (Aug 23, 2020)

8ball said:


> Wouldn't surprise me if that QAnon stuff is getting imported too.


Oh shit...taken my eye off things for a bit...sorry, what's that?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 23, 2020)

brogdale said:


> Massively high loon spud/FMOTL quotient in that lot there, I'd wager.



If a bunch of people wish to spend their time travelling to Buck House and shouting Paedophile at the building, I’ll take that.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 23, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> If a bunch of people wish to spend their time travelling to Buck House and shouting Paedophile at the building, I’ll take that.


Yeah, I'm relaxed about it...but...scratch the surface and...?


----------



## 8ball (Aug 23, 2020)

brogdale said:


> Oh shit...taken my eye off things for a bit...sorry, what's that?



I don't think you're going to like it...

Link to the Atlantic - article has overview.
Big interlinked conspiracy theory with accusations of child trafficking more or less at the centre.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 23, 2020)

brogdale said:


> Yeah, I'm relaxed about it...but...scratch the surface and...?



Loons, obviously.


----------



## MrSki (Aug 23, 2020)

magneze said:


> Last year apparently.


Where have you heard that from?


----------



## magneze (Aug 23, 2020)

MrSki said:


> Where have you heard that from?


Your own twitter link.


----------



## MrSki (Aug 23, 2020)

magneze said:


> Your own twitter link.


 Well buck house is trending on twitter & there are loads of other reports.


----------



## magneze (Aug 23, 2020)

MrSki said:


> Well buck house is trending on twitter & there are loads of other reports.


Could you link to some? Coming up empty here and Twitter is mostly trending about football.


----------



## MrSki (Aug 23, 2020)

magneze said:


> Could you link to some? Coming up empty here and Twitter is mostly trending about football.


A few recent ones.


----------



## magneze (Aug 23, 2020)

So just Twitter links then. Another of which has a comment to indicate that these aren't recent pics. And another with Soros and Rothschilds hashtags. 🤔


----------



## two sheds (Aug 23, 2020)

and of course #saveourchildren weirdoes


----------



## MrSki (Aug 23, 2020)

magneze said:


> So just Twitter links then. Another of which has a comment to indicate that these aren't recent pics. And another with Soros and Rothschilds hashtags. 🤔


I thought it strange that there is a lack of facemasks in the footage but if it is from last year I don't remember it being reported.

You could always search twitter yourself. You asked for some links (I presumed youmeant twitter)  & provided a few from the last hour or so. Sorry if I got the wrong end of the stick.


----------



## two sheds (Aug 23, 2020)

MrSki said:


> I don't remember it being reported.



just ask yourself _why_ they weren't reported, eh? eh?


----------



## 8ball (Aug 23, 2020)

two sheds said:


> and of course #saveourchildren weirdoes



I saw something posted about a "Save The Children" march and wondered what the charity was up to.
This is way weirder.


----------



## agricola (Aug 23, 2020)

Wilf said:


> He almost certainly is an abuser and has a well documented set of allegations against him, including rape. But to answer your question, even though clinton seems to have been a regular on the nonce's plane, there are no specific epstein related allegations against him (afaik).



I thought there were at least a couple in the Epstein series on Netflix?


----------



## MrSki (Aug 23, 2020)

Well this was certainly from this year if you listen to it. 



The first tweet of the three shows the protest moving to Buck house I presume.


----------



## belboid (Aug 23, 2020)

It’s set up Qanon shits.  Like the way the bloke  starts with there being more cops there than at a BLM rally, cos ‘that was a fake, this is real shit’


----------



## 8ball (Aug 23, 2020)

MrSki said:


> Well this was certainly from this year if you listen to it.



I find myself pondering the significance of a red football on a stick.


----------



## MrSki (Aug 24, 2020)

Well this twitter video shows a protestor wearing a mask at 8 seconds in.


----------



## BigTom (Aug 24, 2020)

#saveourchildren is current Qanon bullshit, from that tag alone it's not from last year.
weird thing is that I thought the Qanon/pizzagate crap was at least partly meant to serve as a distraction away from the epstein/maxwell reality.
I'm surprised they are wearing masks tbh because from what  I see from reddit the crossover bewteen USA Qanon idiots and covid-19 deniers is very large indeed.


----------



## two sheds (Aug 24, 2020)

It hadn't really struck me that epstein was the reason the #saveourchildren idiots have got going. I'd assumed it was just pure invention like the mole children, but if epstein held parties and  more kids _were _groomed then that's where they're getting the high-level paedophile ring cover-up from.  

but I'm now assuming the mole children _are _just an invention


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 24, 2020)

freakydave said:


> They were probably psychopathic, but they were obviously very intelligent and together. You must have met psychopaths before, usually it's a disability and they have awful short and violent lives, especially if they are born in poor circumstances.
> 
> I should not have used 'brilliant' though, that was just me getting carried away with myself


I don't think it's accurate to portray being psychopathic as a disability.


----------



## William of Walworth (Aug 24, 2020)

More for the main Qanon thread this probably  ....

But why in hell have that bunch of conspiranoid lunatics got any following in the *UK*, FFS???


----------



## 8ball (Aug 25, 2020)

William of Walworth said:


> More for the main Qanon thread this probably  ....
> 
> But why in hell have that bunch of conspiranoid lunatics got any following in the *UK*, FFS???



Because we follow what they do over the pond.  And we’ve had conspiranoids here for ever.


----------



## krtek a houby (Aug 25, 2020)

William of Walworth said:


> More for the main Qanon thread this probably  ....
> 
> But why in hell have that bunch of conspiranoid lunatics got any following in the *UK*, FFS???



Happening in Ireland, too. It's like a virus.


----------



## badseed (Sep 14, 2020)

Prince Andrew will be 'left out' of plans for Philip's 100th birthday
					

He's reportedly not going to be invited to the major celebrations after the Epstein scandal.




					metro.co.uk
				




No birthday cake.
Excluded from such a big event is probably a big deal in royal circles . Not really justice though is it


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 14, 2020)

It isn't meant to be justice it's meant to avoid the risk of embarrassing Brenda. Perhaps she will do a Trump and claim she barely knows He Who Cannot Sweat


----------



## brogdale (Sep 14, 2020)

MickiQ said:


> It isn't meant to be justice it's meant to avoid the risk of embarrassing Brenda. Perhaps she will do a Trump and claim she barely knows He Who Cannot Sweat


True, but it suggests that they know there's a good deal more to come out.


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 14, 2020)

brogdale said:


> True, but it suggests that they know there's a good deal more to come out.


I don't think Brenda's advisors know anymore than the public but until Maxwell's trial is over they must be shitting themselves she will reveal stuff. No doubt He Who Cannot Sweat has assured them of his total innocence but after that car crash interview of his, they probably don't believe him anymore than I do.


----------



## Shellee (Sep 14, 2020)

Maybe they just don't like him enough to take any chances? Being the "spare" is a weird gig in family dynamics.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 14, 2020)

Shellee said:


> Maybe they just don't like him enough to take any chances? Being the "spare" is a weird gig in family dynamics.


Congratulations on your first post since joining in 2014.

I wouldn't be at all surprised that they don't like him.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 14, 2020)

Shellee said:


> Maybe they just don't like him enough to take any chances? Being the "spare" is a weird gig in family dynamics.


they should do what you'd do with any other extraneous wheel and leave him on the verge in a remote country lane


----------



## killer b (Sep 14, 2020)

Sure I read somewhere (probably this thread) that Andrew is the favourite son rather than a spare wheel.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 14, 2020)

Household mixing... rule of 6... no sex offenders... poor old Phil, he just wants a party. 

Maybe the cunt should celebrate by doing 100 laps of his garden 1000 acre estate like that Captain Tom Moore.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 14, 2020)

Wilf said:


> Household mixing... rule of 6... no sex offenders... poor old Phil, he just wants a party.
> 
> Maybe the cunt should celebrate by doing 100 laps of his garden 1000 acre estate like that Captain Tom Moore.


he should blaze the prince philip memorial route from doris bay to austin head


the proposed route across south georgia


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 14, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> he should blaze the prince philip memorial route from doris bay to austin head
> 
> View attachment 230321
> the proposed route across south georgia




Will settle for him stopping here...


----------



## brogdale (Sep 14, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> he should blaze the prince philip memorial route from doris bay to austin head
> 
> View attachment 230321
> the proposed route across south georgia


Is it possible to propose that the people's justice committee consider a slight re-routing of the memorial route to take in the (considerably higher) col between Mount Roots and Nordenskjold Peak? I'm at that altitude the views over to Undine South Harbour would be more rewarding?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 14, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Will settle for him stopping here...
> 
> View attachment 230325


doesn't fulfil the description of the ppmr as being from coast to coast in s georgia


----------



## Lord Camomile (Sep 14, 2020)

Let's be honest, not being invited to a big family gathering isn't always the _worst_ thing. I suppose it is his dad, though, rather than a distant great uncle or something.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 14, 2020)

Lord Camomile said:


> Let's be honest, not being invited to a big family gathering isn't always the _worst_ thing. I suppose it is his dad, though, rather than a distant great uncle or something.


yeh but i hear harry expected to be there and philip isn't his grandfather


----------



## klang (Sep 14, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> they should do what you'd do with any other extraneous wheel


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 14, 2020)

littleseb said:


> View attachment 230330


while i wouldn't be put out if andrew was necklaced (and nor indeed would he) i think some people would find it excessive

what's wrong with the traditional breaking on the wheel?


----------



## Wilf (Sep 14, 2020)

Ghislaine Maxwell: 'Hello Philip, I'm so sorry I can't be with you in person on your big day, but I might be out for your 200th'.


----------



## krtek a houby (Sep 14, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> they should do what you'd do with any other extraneous wheel and leave him on the verge in a remote country lane



March him up the top of the hill


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 14, 2020)

krtek a houby said:


> March him up the top of the hill


and throw him off the side.


----------



## campanula (Sep 14, 2020)

'and through'? Pickmans - I expected better from such a noted pedant


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 14, 2020)

campanula said:


> 'and through'? Pickmans - I expected better from such a noted pedant


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 14, 2020)

Even our most noted pedant can have an off day. He probably had to do some work.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 14, 2020)

equationgirl said:


> Even our most noted pedant can have an off day. He probably had to do some work.


'our most-maligned pedant' would have been better. and i did have to do some work, between 9.55 and 10


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 14, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> 'our most-maligned pedant' would have been better. and i did have to do some work, between 9.55 and 10


Nightmare.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 14, 2020)

equationgirl said:


> Nightmare.


yeh. but that's the wonderful world of work for you


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 14, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh. but that's the wonderful world of work for you


True, true. Come the revolution things will improve, I'm sure.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 14, 2020)

equationgirl said:


> True, true. Come the revolution things will improve, I'm sure.


tbh at the moment the heavy lifting is being done by managers. i have to have training later in the week about new systems and how the library will work in the new normal. but i think we'll be sent home again in a month or six weeks.


----------



## seeformiles (Sep 14, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> while i wouldn't be put out if andrew was necklaced (and nor indeed would he) i think some people would find it excessive
> 
> what's wrong with the traditional breaking on the wheel?
> 
> View attachment 230334



Bleeding heart liberal....


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 14, 2020)

seeformiles said:


> Bleeding heart liberal....


i'd expect him to be bleeding from all over the rest of his body too before the executioner's finished.


----------



## TopCat (Sep 14, 2020)

His stress levels must be severe. If Ghislaine talks he is so fucked. This current distancing from his family just looks like damage limitation.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 14, 2020)

TopCat said:


> His stress levels must be severe. If Ghislaine talks he is so fucked. This current distancing from his family just looks like damage limitation.


perhaps he'll be appointed governor of the falkland islands, to get him out the way. and then there'll be a hunting 'accident'.


----------



## Aladdin (Sep 14, 2020)

Bets on both kicking the bucket before the birthday?


Also...
(How arrogant does one have to be to start preparing for one's 100th birthday 10 months ahead of time?)


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 14, 2020)

Sugar Kane said:


> Bets on both kicking the bucket before the birthday?
> 
> 
> Also...
> (How arrogant does one have to be to start preparing for one's 100th birthday 10 months ahead of time?)


they have to see how many of the invitees are still alive
and bump off the inconvenient ones


----------



## two sheds (Sep 14, 2020)

Sugar Kane said:


> Bets on both kicking the bucket before the birthday?
> 
> 
> Also...
> (How arrogant does one have to be to start preparing for one's 100th birthday 10 months ahead of time?)



is this the real birthday or the official birthday though?


----------



## Wilf (Sep 14, 2020)

two sheds said:


> is this the real birthday or the official birthday though?


Technically, it's his lizard hatching day.


----------



## Aladdin (Sep 14, 2020)

two sheds said:


> is this the real birthday or the official birthday though?



Does he have two birthdays too? 😡


----------



## two sheds (Sep 14, 2020)

ah we talking about his birthday not Hers? I missed that


----------



## Wilf (Sep 14, 2020)

Does she send him a telegram?

'Dear Philip, fuck off and take that nonce of a son with you. Stop.'


----------



## brogdale (Sep 14, 2020)

He's not gonna last another 7 months, is he?


----------



## Duncan2 (Sep 14, 2020)

brogdale said:


> He's not gonna last another 7 months, is he?


Perhaps someone,preferably close relative,can be persuaded to make a life-saving donation of vital organs?


----------



## Zapp Brannigan (Sep 14, 2020)

That's what this arsehole of a year has been all about.  The lizard people have planted a virus so they can test the whole population of earth to find suitable donors, just so Prince fucking Philip can cheat death for another few weeks.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 14, 2020)

brogdale said:


> He's not gonna last another 7 months, is he?



The nonce formally known as Prince ( Andrew ) ?


----------



## Wilf (Sep 14, 2020)

What joyful affairs the gatherings of the royals must be.


----------



## Badgers (Sep 14, 2020)

Wilf said:


> What joyful affairs the gatherings of the royals must be.


Fergie, Megan and Andrew doing lines of bugle in the servants toilets.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 14, 2020)

Badgers said:


> Fergie, Megan and Andrew doing lines of bugle in the servants toilets.


Presume Charles doesn't get involved. Famously, he can't even sort out his own toothpaste.


----------



## Badgers (Sep 14, 2020)

Wilf said:


> Presume Charles doesn't get involved. Famously, he can't even sort out his own toothpaste.


His fingers stank of caviar as much as the next man, regardless of their status


----------



## Wilf (Sep 14, 2020)

Badgers said:


> His fingers stank of caviar as much as the next man, regardless of their status


What, _those _fingers?



brogdale said:


> A brief look at Chucky's chunky sausage digits would suggest that may be a fair bet..


----------



## Badgers (Sep 15, 2020)




----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 15, 2020)

Wilf said:


> Presume Charles doesn't get involved. Famously, he can't even sort out his own toothpaste.



No doubt he will get the servant that irons his shoelaces to help him.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 15, 2020)

Wilf said:


> Presume Charles doesn't get involved. Famously, he can't even sort out his own toothpaste.



Maybe the bugle is why?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Sep 21, 2020)

Via


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Oct 11, 2020)

somewhere in SE London (from tweeter)


----------



## TopCat (Oct 11, 2020)

Puddy_Tat said:


> somewhere in SE London (from tweeter)


Get yer licks in first...


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 12, 2020)

The Queen 'stops selling Prince Andrew postcards' following Epstein scandal
					

Staff at a gift shop in Balmoral have told visitors that pictures featuring Prince Andrew have been taken off the shelves. The Duke of York has been criticised for his friendship with Jeffrey Epstein




					www.mirror.co.uk
				





A person who visited the gift shop in Balmoral “Previously Andrew postcards have been on sale.

"But while there are postcards of Charles, Anne and Edward - and even the Queen’s grandchildren, Beatrice and Eugenie - there is not one of the Duke of York.

“When I asked if it was possible to buy one of Andrew, a sales assistant said ‘No, we’ve taken them away. And they won’t be making any more of them.’"


----------



## Sue (Oct 12, 2020)

Who knew postcards of the royal family were a thing..? Bizarre.


----------



## T & P (Oct 12, 2020)

Sue said:


> Who knew postcards of the royal family were a thing..? Bizarre.


If that wasn’t a sarcastic post, I gather you don’t live in London? Just about every tat/ newsagents/ souvenir shop within Zone 1 sells postcards of the Royal Family, including  extra classy ones that are shaped like their heads, and even featuring long-dead Princess Diana. The image below is of one such product



I’ve been known to occasionally use such postcards for birthday card purposes. Good for a gentle pisstake or to raise a laugh for the right recipient.


----------



## Sue (Oct 12, 2020)

T & P said:


> If that wasn’t a sarcastic post, *I gather you don’t live in London*? Just about every tat/ newsagents/ souvenir shop within Zone 1 sells postcards of the Royal Family, including  extra classy ones that are shaped like their heads, and even featuring long-dead Princess Diana
> 
> View attachment 234137
> 
> I’ve been known to use such postcards for birthday card purposes. Good for a gentle pisstake or to raise a laugh for the right recipient.


I do. Guess I just don't go into souvenir/tat shops in Zone 1...


----------



## T & P (Oct 12, 2020)

Sue said:


> I do. Guess I just don't go into souvenir/tat shops in Zone 1...


I don’t either, and don’t work or frequent the proper touristy bits of central London, but in such areas as the approach road to Buckingham Palace or sometimes around Piccadilly/ Leicester Sq, tat shops have those metal stands outside their premises so you don’t even need to go inside one to spot them.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Oct 13, 2020)

T & P said:


> If that wasn’t a sarcastic post, I gather you don’t live in London? Just about every tat/ newsagents/ souvenir shop within Zone 1 sells postcards of the Royal Family, including  extra classy ones that are shaped like their heads, and even featuring long-dead Princess Diana. The image below is of one such product
> 
> View attachment 234137
> 
> I’ve been known to occasionally use such postcards for birthday card purposes. Good for a gentle pisstake or to raise a laugh for the right recipient.


I've got that very postcard!


----------



## krtek a houby (Oct 13, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The Queen 'stops selling Prince Andrew postcards' following Epstein scandal
> 
> 
> Staff at a gift shop in Balmoral have told visitors that pictures featuring Prince Andrew have been taken off the shelves. The Duke of York has been criticised for his friendship with Jeffrey Epstein
> ...



Be great if he was talking about the entire royal clan.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 13, 2020)

So next time someone describes Andrew as "a card", it can be pointed out that he's actually not.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 13, 2020)

Raheem said:


> So next time someone describes Andrew as "a card", it can be pointed out that he's actually not.


He's had his marked


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 13, 2020)

Sue said:


> I do. Guess I just don't go into souvenir/tat shops in Zone 1...


No one does these days


----------



## Dogsauce (Oct 13, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> No one does these days



maybe another royal death can be arranged to help their sales recover from the pandemic. Cark out to help out.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 13, 2020)

Dogsauce said:


> maybe another royal death can be arranged to help their sales recover from the pandemic. Cark out to help out.


Yeh could also sell relics like princess di's fingers and what-not, 1 for a fiver and 10 for £40 and so on


----------



## kenny g (Oct 13, 2020)

T & P said:


> I don’t either, and don’t work or frequent the proper touristy bits of central London, but in such areas as the approach road to Buckingham Palace or sometimes around Piccadilly/ Leicester Sq, tat shops have those metal stands outside their premises so you don’t even need to go inside one to spot them.


I guess they have become another one of those things the mind filters out when traversing zone 1.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 13, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh could also sell relics like princess di's fingers and what-not, 1 for a fiver and 10 for £40 and so on




" 'ere guv, got 28 genuine Lady Di fingers, yours for a monkey."


----------



## pesh (Oct 13, 2020)

helium airbags for the kiddies...


----------



## brogdale (Oct 13, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> " 'ere guv, got 28 genuine Lady Di fingers, yours for a monkey."


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 13, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> " 'ere guv, got 28 genuine Lady Di fingers, yours for a monkey."


they grow them from stem cells in a lab in the caymans


----------



## Sue (Oct 13, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh could also sell relics like princess di's fingers and what-not, 1 for a fiver and 10 for £40 and so on


 The modern equivalent of splinters of the True Cross, Christ's foreskin etc.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 13, 2020)

Sue said:


> The modern equivalent of splinters of the True Cross, Christ's foreskin etc.


imagine how many 'christ's foreskins' you could get from michael gove

he'd be worth far more dead than alive


----------



## seeformiles (Oct 13, 2020)

Sue said:


> Who knew postcards of the royal family were a thing..? Bizarre.



That’s just the tip of the Royal tat you can buy. Mrs SFM always asks me to bring her back the tackiest thing I can find when I’m down in the smoke. Once I asked a chap outside Victoria Coach Station for the tackiest thing he had and he sold me a Duke of Edinburgh pencil sharpener.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Oct 13, 2020)

brogdale said:


> View attachment 234159


I'm no Attenborough, but I'm between 75 and 80% certain that's no monkey


----------



## Espresso (Oct 13, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> imagine how many 'christ's foreskins' you could get from michael gove
> 
> he'd be worth far more dead than alive



Wasn't Christ Jewish?


----------



## Sue (Oct 13, 2020)

Espresso said:


> Wasn't Christ Jewish?


Exactly. Hence the foreskin relics.


----------



## Espresso (Oct 13, 2020)

Sue said:


> Exactly. Hence the foreskin relics.


Sorry, brain has melted on furlough.

I beg your pardon, Pickman's model


----------



## Saul Goodman (Oct 13, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh could also sell relics like princess di's fingers and what-not, 1 for a fiver and a full set of 12 for £40 and so on


CFY


----------



## Raheem (Oct 13, 2020)

Sue said:


> Hence the foreskin relics.


Thought that would be good as a Latin motto, but Google translate gave me "Unde igitur præputium reliquiae", which is a bit disappointing.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 13, 2020)

.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 13, 2020)

Raheem said:


> Thought that would be good as a Latin motto, but Google translate gave me "Unde igitur præputium reliquiae", which is a bit disappointing.




Just “ Igitur præputium reliquiae”. Would look fine gracing any coat of arms.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 13, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Just “ Igitur præputium reliquiae”. Would look fine gracing any coat of arms.


Under a glans rampant.


----------



## Badgers (Oct 13, 2020)

I have an Andrew & Fergie wedding jigsaw puzzle in a commemorative tin. 
Might now be the time to cash in or should I wait for the court case/imprisonment/death?


----------



## Sue (Oct 13, 2020)

Badgers said:


> I have an Andrew & Fergie wedding jigsaw puzzle in a commemorative tin.
> Might now be the time to cash in or should I wait for the court case/imprisonment/death?


Was going to ask why but I've decided I really don't want to know...


----------



## two sheds (Oct 13, 2020)

sell it now you might need to put up bail, depending on what you were caught doing


----------



## Badgers (Oct 13, 2020)

Sue said:


> Was going to ask why but I've decided I really don't want to know...


I have an interest in collecting nonsense


----------



## Wilf (Oct 13, 2020)

Badgers said:


> I have an interest in collecting nonsense


Hmmm... I might patent a Snakes and Ladders game: 'Land on Pizza Express and zoom up the ladder to Tramps. But land on Paedo Island and you're on the slide to Belmarsh'.


----------



## Dogsauce (Oct 13, 2020)

Badgers said:


> I have an Andrew & Fergie wedding jigsaw puzzle in a commemorative tin.
> Might now be the time to cash in or should I wait for the court case/imprisonment/death?



Sell now. My Jim’ll fixit soap medallion in original packaging and large collection of Rolf Harris Stylophones and related memorabilia ain’t worth what they used to be.


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 13, 2020)

Badgers said:


> I have an interest in collecting nonsense


When my gran died, we hired one of these house clearance places who told my Mum to take anything she wanted and they would give her a grand for everything left. My brother and I cleared it out and took away a few bits of jewellery but mostly stuff with sentimental value like photos and my grandad's drawings. She had loads of royal tat, plates, mugs etc some of it going back to the coronation. I would imagine to people who treasure this stuff some of it would be valuable. 
The Q brothers are not such people and we would have just skipped it so we left it for the house clearance peeps. He was really happy when he came and paid my Mum so presumably he knew people daft enough to buy it.


----------



## Idris2002 (Oct 13, 2020)

MickiQ said:


> When my gran died, we hired one of these house clearance places who told my Mum to take anything she wanted and they would give her a grand for everything left. My brother and I cleared it out and took away a few bits of jewellery but mostly stuff with sentimental value like photos and my grandad's drawings. She had loads of royal tat, plates, mugs etc some of it going back to the coronation. I would imagine to people who treasure this stuff some of it would be valuable.
> The Q brothers are not such people and we would have just skipped it so we left it for the house clearance peeps. He was really happy when he came and paid my Mum so presumably he knew people daft enough to buy it.


I'd imagine Coronation era stuff might have some historical value at this point, with implications for its resale price.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 13, 2020)

Dogsauce said:


> Sell now. My Jim’ll fixit soap medallion in original packaging and large collection of Rolf Harris Stylophones and related memorabilia ain’t worth what they used to be.
> 
> View attachment 234194


Niche, certainly.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 13, 2020)

Soon after they removed a Savile statue and his gravestone from display I proposed they set up a Museum of Redacted Public Statuary. It'll need a new fucking wing for Prince Creepo's stuff.

We could perhaps commission Tracy Emin to do an installation: 'The Upstairs at Ghislaine's that I Never Visited'.

Damien Hirst could chip in with 'The Physical Impossibility of Sweat in the Mind of Someone Living'.

Of course Monet would be star of the show with 'Déjeuner sur l'herbe la Pizza Express'


----------



## seeformiles (Oct 13, 2020)

Badgers said:


> I have an Andrew & Fergie wedding jigsaw puzzle in a commemorative tin.
> Might now be the time to cash in or should I wait for the court case/imprisonment/death?



I bought this for 10p in a shop in Leeds in 1989. Left it for the next tenant when we moved house:


----------



## Streathamite (Oct 13, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> imagine how many 'christ's foreskins' you could get from michael gove
> 
> he'd be worth far more dead than alive


Uggh!
Brain bleach needed


----------



## two sheds (Oct 13, 2020)

seeformiles said:


> I bought this for 10p in a shop in Leeds in 1989. Left it for the next tenant when we moved house:
> 
> View attachment 234211



You're evil


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 13, 2020)

I’ve got a Lady Di t-shirt and I still wear it


----------



## TopCat (Oct 13, 2020)

Ghislaine Maxwell lawyers attempt to keep deposition details secret
					

Lawyers say unsealing details related to Maxwell’s relationship with Jeffrey Epstein will undermine her right to a fair trial




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Raheem (Oct 13, 2020)

Orang Utan said:


> I’ve got a Lady Di t-shirt and I still wear it


That would make a great t-shirt slogan.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 13, 2020)

Badgers said:


> I have an interest in collecting nonsense



Or, in Andrew's case, nonce-sense.


----------



## Dogsauce (Oct 14, 2020)

Disappointingly I can’t find a picture of the Lady Di horse brass I have somewhere. It’s a really poor likeness which makes it even better.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 14, 2020)

Dogsauce said:


> Disappointingly I can’t find a picture of the Lady Di horse brass I have somewhere. It’s a really poor likeness which makes it even better.



There's a few narsty ones out there...






Clearly none a patch on...


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 14, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> There's a few narsty ones out there...
> 
> View attachment 234284
> 
> ...


Sweet Jesus, that last one can't possibly be real surely?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 14, 2020)

Whatever beverage brims in this cup
Thank God for Prince Charles when you pick it up
And as you quaff it, bless that same grand Planner
Who gave him for a bride the fair Diana


----------



## ska invita (Oct 14, 2020)

MickiQ said:


> Sweet Jesus, that last one can't possibly be real surely?


Viz, blatantly


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 14, 2020)

MickiQ the Max Clifford Mint across the top should have given it away


----------



## two sheds (Oct 14, 2020)

and which is which on the second of the brasses?


----------



## BigTom (Oct 14, 2020)

ska invita said:


> Viz, blatantly



Doesn't Private Eye do a lot of these things as well? I thought that's where it was from.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Oct 14, 2020)

MickiQ said:


> Sweet Jesus, that last one can't possibly be real surely?


Do you reckon?  🤣 

Max Clifford mint


----------



## T & P (Oct 14, 2020)

two sheds said:


> and which is which on the second of the brasses?


One of the most infamous Big Brother contestants, who went from pantomime villain to national treasure when she was diagnosed with and later died from cancer. Can’t remember her name.


----------



## killer b (Oct 14, 2020)

BigTom said:


> Doesn't Private Eye do a lot of these things as well? I thought that's where it was from.


the private eye wishes it could be that funny


----------



## two sheds (Oct 14, 2020)




----------



## TopCat (Oct 16, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> There's a few narsty ones out there...
> 
> View attachment 234284
> 
> ...


Viz?


----------



## dessiato (Oct 16, 2020)

T & P said:


> One of the most infamous Big Brother contestants, who went from pantomime villain to national treasure when she was diagnosed with and later died from cancer. Can’t remember her name.


Jade Goody perhaps.


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 16, 2020)

T & P said:


> One of the most infamous Big Brother contestants, who went from pantomime villain to national treasure when she was diagnosed with and later died from cancer. Can’t remember her name.



I seem to recall the story was a bit more eventful then that.  Something along the lines of:

Ha ha look at that _common thicko_
Actually its really bad to point and laugh at someone because they are a _common thicko_. Shame on you
It turns out she's a bit racist so its fine to point and laugh and throw in some hate whilst you're there
Oh she has terminal cancer and her kids are about to lose their mother.  _She's a Saint!_

God this country is depressing at times.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 16, 2020)

Yep , Jade Goody. plenty of sneering as they knocked her down, then elevated sainthood as she was dying from cervical cancer IIRC. Like a reverse Katie price/ Jordan. appalling behavior. Viz took the Chris Morris approach with this ad- that fine line between taking the piss and the swipe at the red top vermin and pulled it off i think


----------



## T & P (Oct 16, 2020)

Teaboy said:


> I seem to recall the story was a bit more eventful then that.  Something along the lines of:
> 
> Ha ha look at that _common thicko_
> Actually its really bad to point and laugh at someone because they are a _common thicko_. Shame on you
> ...


Yes, that's quite right. My mind had washed off details fo the whole affair, but it was pretty much as you summarise. IIRC her mother came into play at some point as well.


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 16, 2020)

It was pretty disgraceful.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 16, 2020)

equationgirl said:


> MickiQ the Max Clifford Mint across the top should have given it away



Max Clifford's dead isn't he? Remembering that cheered me right up, thanks


----------



## Dogsauce (Oct 16, 2020)

SpookyFrank said:


> Max Clifford's dead isn't he? Remembering that cheered me right up, thanks



Only because he knew too much...


----------



## dessiato (Oct 16, 2020)

Teaboy said:


> I seem to recall the story was a bit more eventful then that.  Something along the lines of:
> 
> Ha ha look at that _common thicko_
> Actually its really bad to point and laugh at someone because they are a _common thicko_. Shame on you
> ...


Because of the publicity around her condition a lo5 of women got themselves checked, as a result a lot of lives were saved.


----------



## belboid (Oct 17, 2020)

Interesting piece - I called everyone in Jeffrey Epstein's little black book.


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 17, 2020)

.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 23, 2020)

Prince Andrew asked Ghislaine Maxwell about accuser, documents suggest
					

Deposition made in 2016 as Maxwell faced questions about late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 23, 2020)

Maxwell is so gonna grass his royal arse next year


----------



## Saul Goodman (Oct 23, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Maxwell is so gonna grass his royal arse next year


I doubt it.


----------



## two sheds (Oct 23, 2020)

I had a skim through the article on her deposition and it all seemed to be "I know naaaaaaaaaaaathing".


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 23, 2020)

Saul Goodman said:


> I doubt it.



She’s been sat in a box for over three months now, all alone with nothing to do other than contemplate that box being her world forever. So far nothing has gone her way, unless she is more stupid than one of Andy’s alibis she’ll realise that the only way out of this mess will be to start singing. Her trial is not for another nine months at least, she’ll grass.


----------



## souljacker (Oct 23, 2020)

belboid said:


> Interesting piece - I called everyone in Jeffrey Epstein's little black book.



I do like the first line in that article



> Jeffrey Epstein’s little black book is one of the most cursed documents ever compiled in this miserable, dying country.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Oct 23, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> She’s been sat in a box for over three months now, all alone with nothing to do other than contemplate that box being her world forever. So far nothing has gone her way, unless she is more stupid than one of Andy’s alibis she’ll realise that the only way out of this mess will be to start singing. Her trial is not for another nine months at least, she’ll grass.


She might get a reduced sentence for _not_ grassing.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 23, 2020)

Saul Goodman said:


> She might get a reduced sentence for _not_ grassing.


Or for saying everyone was getting Prince Andrew confused with Hunter Biden.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 23, 2020)

Paedipus Rex.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 23, 2020)

Saul Goodman said:


> She might get a reduced sentence for _not_ grassing.


Plus has the knowledge of Epstein dying.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 24, 2020)

I was just about to type _The comeback kid..._then thought...


----------



## weltweit (Oct 24, 2020)

Not a great decision ..


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 24, 2020)

weltweit said:


> Not a great decision ..


Oh I think it's a fantastic decision. 

First assignment - representing British business in Washington DC.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Oct 24, 2020)

weltweit said:


> Not a great decision ..


Noncesense, innit.


----------



## two sheds (Oct 24, 2020)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Oh I think it's a fantastic decision.
> 
> First assignment - representing British business in Washington DC.



After a few interviews with the press.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 25, 2020)

a lifetime of (self ) service


----------



## Wilf (Oct 25, 2020)

brogdale said:


> I was just about to type _The comeback kid..._then thought...
> 
> View attachment 235736


On the 'good to day to bury bad news' logic, there must be some _catastrophic _events taking place today.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 25, 2020)

Wilf said:


> On the 'good to day to bury bad news' logic, there must be some _catastrophic _events taking place today.


Easy even for the Royals; every day is a catastrophic event atm.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 25, 2020)

brogdale said:


> Easy even for the Royals; every day is a catastrophic event atm.



Any day that ends with you still living in a castle and flossing bits of roast swan out of your teeth scarcely counts as a catastrophe in my book.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 25, 2020)

SpookyFrank said:


> Any day that ends with you still living in a castle and flossing bits of roast swan out of your teeth scarcely counts as a catastrophe in my book.


Didn't mean for the lizards...I meant for us.


----------



## bimble (Dec 14, 2020)




----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 14, 2020)

bimble said:


>



Happy Monday!


----------



## TopCat (Dec 14, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> Happy Monday!


I got a covid notification this morning.  This nonce news has cheered me up!


----------



## agricola (Dec 14, 2020)

bimble said:


>




I wonder what this dead cat is meant to distract us from?


----------



## Jay Park (Dec 14, 2020)

agricola said:


> I wonder what this dead cat is meant to distract us from?



the Express has a new revelation about Diana. Or Bill Gates has gone berserk with ol’Valerie and she’s been tearing up her local high street.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 15, 2020)

Well, it's difficult, given the high esteem I held him in, but I'm now reluctantly having to face up to the fact the HRH Andrew Windsor may not represent all that is best in humanity.  

Oh, and he's a filthy raving nonce as well.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Dec 15, 2020)

I've not been following this thread recently, so hadn't seen the Mail's front page posted above by Bimble, but watching Sky News' 'Press Preview', I was surprised to see they had censored the top half of the Mail's front page today, so grabbed it from the BBC's website.

They certainly seem to be going to town on the cunt.


----------



## Part 2 (Dec 15, 2020)

Ghislaine Maxwell lodges $28.5m bail bid involving armed guards
					

Socialite’s lawyers argue she will not flee US over charges of assisting sexual abuse by Jeffrey Epstein




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Jay Park (Dec 15, 2020)

Part 2 said:


> Ghislaine Maxwell lodges $28.5m bail bid involving armed guards
> 
> 
> Socialite’s lawyers argue she will not flee US over charges of assisting sexual abuse by Jeffrey Epstein
> ...



the irony of your tag-line


----------



## Orang Utan (Dec 15, 2020)




----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 15, 2020)

Orang Utan said:


> View attachment 243671


good work ou


----------



## Argonia (Dec 23, 2020)

Epstein and Maxwell guests of honour in 2000









						Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell were Prince Andrew's guests
					

DailyMail.com has unearthed a souvenir booklet from the party which lists pedophile Epstein and his alleged madam among the star-studded guests at the 2000 party.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Saul Goodman (Dec 23, 2020)

Argonia said:


> Epstein and Maxwell guests of honour in 2000
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## DaveCinzano (Dec 23, 2020)

Orang Utan said:


> View attachment 243671


Still funny three months on


----------



## Argonia (Jan 1, 2021)




----------



## cyril_smear (Jan 1, 2021)

DaveCinzano said:


> Still funny three months on


I’m sure I’ve seen a photo with a ^not added to it.


----------



## BigMoaner (Jan 1, 2021)

bimble said:


>



Lovely stuff.


----------



## magneze (Jan 1, 2021)

Finger on the pulse there.


----------



## Argonia (Jan 13, 2021)

They're all at it.









						Royal family member faces prison sentence over violent sex assault in Scottish ancestral home
					

The Queen's cousin faces being jailed for up to five years after carrying out a violent sex attack inside his ancestral home at Glamis Castle.




					www.scotsman.com


----------



## dessiato (Jan 13, 2021)

Argonia said:


> They're all at it.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


But he was drunk and has apologised, so that's ok then. Where di people get the idea this excuse is acceptable? I've been drunk a lot of times, but I've never tried to rape someone.


----------



## jakethesnake (Jan 13, 2021)

I'll be amazed if he goes to prison.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 13, 2021)

dessiato said:


> But he was drunk and has apologised, so that's ok then. Where di people get the idea this excuse is acceptable? I've been drunk a lot of times, but I've never tried to rape someone.




Odd isn't it? Bit like the medication various folk take which turns them racist. None of this is their underlying personality, oh no...


----------



## Spymaster (Jan 13, 2021)

dessiato said:


> But he was drunk and has apologised, so that's ok then. Where di people get the idea this excuse is acceptable? I've been drunk a lot of times, but I've never tried to rape someone.


----------



## Duncan2 (Jan 13, 2021)

Doesn't seem to say what Glamis was charged with but assuming it was indecent assault I had thought that the max was more like ten years than "up to five".Perhaps things are done differently in Scotland?


----------



## Argonia (Feb 23, 2021)

Simon Bowes Lyon has been jailed for 10 months. Prince Andrew next!


----------



## Badgers (Mar 9, 2021)

__





						Jeffrey Epstein: Pilot connects Prince Andrew, Bill Clinton to Lolita Express
					





					thenewdaily.com.au
				






> One of Jeffrey Epstein’s long-time pilots is co-operating with the FBI, and has confirmed the late pedophile hosted Bill Clinton on his private plane, nicknamed the Lolita Express.
> 
> Though he declined to make a statement to The Mirror when contacted, David Rodgers, who flew Epstein and his inner circle, has reportedly been assisting with the investigation into the pedophile ring.
> 
> “I can’t talk,” Mr Rodgers told The Mirror from his Lake Worth, Florida home.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 10, 2021)

That 10% +ive towards Andrew Windsor; FFS


----------



## Wilf (Mar 10, 2021)

brogdale said:


> That 10% +ive towards Andrew Windsor; FFS
> 
> View attachment 258142


Suppose the_ Intermittently Sweaty_ Community is larger that you think.

I'm sure that was an online survey. You can imagine, in the old days of in person questionnaires: 

'And are you favourable or not favourable to Prince Andrew?'
- erm, yeah, I suppose so, who cares? Oh hang on, isn't he the...
'Erm, well, yes, he is actually'
- Can I change my vote?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 10, 2021)

brogdale said:


> That 10% +ive towards Andrew Windsor; FFS
> 
> View attachment 258142


at least 80% of that 10% are people confusing prince andrew with someone else, mostly prince edward


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Mar 10, 2021)

Wilf said:


> Suppose the_ Intermittently Sweaty_ Community is larger that you think.



dunno really

in some ways i'm pleasantly surprised it's only 10%

there will be some who take any combination of the following lines -


he's  royal and the royals can do no wrong (isn't that more or less what that twat johnson said?)
he's royal and therefore if he does anything wrong he has the right to because he's royal
it's her fault / she was asking for it / she's a publicity and / or money seeker


----------



## ska invita (Mar 10, 2021)

Yeah 60% for the racist loon vampire in chief makes 10% seem a result


----------



## killer b (Mar 10, 2021)

ska invita said:


> Yeah 60% for the racist loon vampire in chief


he gets a lot of votes just for being really old.


----------



## two sheds (Mar 10, 2021)

Only 49% against Markle which is impressive for the amount of negative press coverage, plus there were 40,000 (?) complaints about Morgan's calling her out.

Eta: the one where he said he didn't believe her about being depressed (I think).


----------



## ska invita (Mar 10, 2021)

killer b said:


> he gets a lot of votes just for being really old.



loveable old racist


----------



## Wilf (Mar 10, 2021)

Suppose there's a residual level that never quite gets wiped out in these surveys. Even Hitler and Bob Geldof probably get 1-2%


----------



## Raheem (Mar 10, 2021)

brogdale said:


> That 10% +ive towards Andrew Windsor; FFS
> 
> View attachment 258142


At first I thought "Catherine" was a made up one designed to catch people out.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 10, 2021)

ska invita said:


> loveable old racist


'_Aww, bless him, always says what he thinks.  I've given him a like in honour of my racist nan...'_


----------



## killer b (Mar 10, 2021)

ska invita said:


> loveable old racist


A solid 50% is just from having been in the war.


----------



## MickiQ (Mar 10, 2021)

Whilst I still think it's very very unlikely he'll ever face any kind of legal sanction, It's going to be very difficult for He Who Cannot Sweat to rebuild any public role for himself. He may have the full support of the Queen (his Mum is hardly a neutral bystander) but getting the support of people with money and power (as opposed to just influence) is going to be a lot harder. Not many companies or organisations want people going on social media and posting their logo with "The Brand of Nonces" as a caption.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 10, 2021)

hmph, today I learn there is site called royal.uk, lists all the parasites and what they get up to. Under Andrew's bit there is a statement that he's stepping back from shaking hands and shit, then there's a link to his personal site, which takes you back to the top of the page you just came from There's also a link to click on to find out about all the great work he does for charidee, click on that and it tells you a lot of them do charity shit and you can search a royal, click on his name and you go back to the top of the page again. They're well shot of him. The sweaty nonce.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 10, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> hmph, today I learn there is site called royal.uk, lists all the parasites and what they get up to. Under Andrew's bit there is a statement that he's stepping back from shaking hands and shit, then there's a link to his personal site, which takes you back to the top of the page you just came from There's also a link to click on to find out about all the great work he does for charidee, click on that and it tells you a lot of them do charity shit and you can search a royal, click on his name and you go back to the top of the page again. They're well shot of him. The sweaty nonce.


frankly it's usually the people he meets who step back from shaking hands with him


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 10, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> frankly it's usually the people he meets who step back from shaking hands with him



They know where those hands have been


----------



## BlanketAddict (Mar 10, 2021)

Wilf said:


> Suppose there's a residual level that never quite gets wiped out in these surveys. Even Hitler and Bob Geldof probably get 1-2%



I heard even Bono managed to scrap 0.5%


----------



## T & P (Mar 10, 2021)

Bono vs Andrew... Now that would be some tight popularity contest.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 10, 2021)

T & P said:


> Bono vs Andrew... Now that would be some tight popularity contest.


Yewtree2


----------



## likesfish (Mar 11, 2021)

T & P said:


> Bono vs Andrew... Now that would be some tight popularity contest.


Think bono would edge that.
* It's ok I'm leaving


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 18, 2021)

Ghislaine Maxwell legal news:









						Judge Rules Some Ghislaine Maxwell Details Are Too 'Sensational and Impure’ to Be Revealed to the Public
					

A federal judge in Manhattan on Thursday ruled on a series of redactions proposed by Ghislaine Maxwell and prosecutors in regards to a compilation of transcripts submitted under seal by the Government last month.




					lawandcrime.com


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 29, 2021)

Moar on Ghislaine:



> Ghislaine Maxwell, the longtime associate of Jeffrey Epstein, was charged on Monday for the first time with sex-trafficking of a minor, as federal prosecutors accused her of grooming a 14-year-old girl to engage in sexual acts with Mr. Epstein and later paying her.
> 
> A new federal indictment filed in Manhattan charged that on multiple occasions between 2001 and 2004, the girl provided nude massages to Mr. Epstein at his Palm Beach, Florida, residence, during which he engaged in sex acts with her.
> 
> The new charges against Ms. Maxwell go further than those contained in an earlier indictment that accused her of helping Mr. Epstein recruit, groom and ultimately sexually abuse girls, but did not include sex-trafficking allegations [...]











						Ghislaine Maxwell Charged With Sex Trafficking of 14-Year-Old Girl
					

A new indictment accuses Ms. Maxwell of paying a victim of her longtime associate Jeffrey Epstein.




					www.nytimes.com


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 29, 2021)

Her trial is in July, seemed a long way off, but with lockdowns and that the months just fly by. That she hasn’t yet worked out that once the US get on to you the only way out is pleading is quite amusing. OJ was an aberration, that won’t happen again and she’ll grow very, very old in prison unless she gives them something. The system is shit beyond words, but she needs to learn fast that a few million dollars means fuck all once you are in their sights.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 29, 2021)

But she is thick as pigshit/arrogant as hell; she hid in New England, she has French citizenship, a sly private flight to France and she’d be safe from the US’s grasp for life, a la Polanski. France ain’t such a bad place to be stuck.


----------



## likesfish (Mar 30, 2021)

Too many people defend Andrew claiming the girl was 17 so perfectly legal🤬.
  Bother understanding the situation was Rotherham with private jets same shit just loads more cash😡


----------



## TopCat (Mar 30, 2021)

It looks like no way out now bar a plead deal. Classic US add more charges tactics. 
The allegations are so numerous now that collectively they turn my stomach.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2021)

TopCat said:


> It looks like no way out now bar a plead deal. Classic US add more charges tactics.
> The allegations are so numerous now that collectively they turn my stomach.


There's always Epstein's way out


----------



## killer b (Mar 30, 2021)

likesfish said:


> Too many people defend Andrew claiming the girl was 17 so perfectly legal🤬.


I don't think I've seen anyone doing this tbh


----------



## likesfish (Mar 30, 2021)

killer b said:


> I don't think I've seen anyone doing this tbh


You obviously hang with half decent human beings I quote and lots of variations of this shite.
Prince Andrew is guilty of nothing worse than exercising poor judgement. Certainly nothing criminally wrong. I quote this bullshit and similar variations  
Prince Andrew is guilty of nothing worse than exercising poor judgement. Certainly nothing criminally wrong.

About 10 years ago, he allegedly had sex with a 17-year old girl in a place where she was over the age of consent. He was 50 and unmarried, so nothing criminal there. A bit creepy, yeah, but there are lots of 17-year olds, male and female, willing to shag a rich, famous celebrity no matter what his/her age.

The young lady in question has alleged that she was forced to have sex with the Prince. Not BY Prince Andrew, but by Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. So, nothing criminal there on Andy’s part.

As the sex allegedly took place during parties, which would have included a lot of alcohol and probably a few other intoxicants, Prince Andrew claims he doesn’t remember the young lady or having sex with her. Not particularly surprising under the circumstances.

Nothing in any of the young lady’s public statements claim that she ever told Andrew she was being “forced” or “trafficked”. He may not be the brightest Crayola in the Royal Crayon Box, but he’s not so stupid that he’d ever go down that road.

About 10 years ago, he allegedly had sex with a 17-year old girl in a place where she was over the age of consent. He was 50 and unmarried, so nothing criminal there. A bit creepy, yeah, but there are lots of 17-year olds, male and female, willing to shag a rich, famous celebrity no matter what his/her age.

The young lady in question has alleged that she was forced to have sex with the Prince. Not BY Prince Andrew, but by Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. So, nothing criminal there on Andy’s part.

As the sex allegedly took place during parties, which would have included a lot of alcohol and probably a few other intoxicants, Prince Andrew claims he doesn’t remember the young lady or having sex with her. Not particularly surprising under the circumstances.

Nothing in any of the young lady’s public statements claim that she ever told Andrew she was being “forced” or “trafficked”. He may not be the brightest Crayola in the Royal Crayon Box, but he’s not so stupid that he’d ever go down that road.


----------



## Argonia (Mar 30, 2021)

He's a sweaty nonce


----------



## killer b (Mar 30, 2021)

likesfish said:


> You obviously hang with half decent human beings I quote and lots of variations of this shite.
> Prince Andrew is guilty of nothing worse than exercising poor judgement. Certainly nothing criminally wrong. I quote this bullshit and similar variations
> Prince Andrew is guilty of nothing worse than exercising poor judgement. Certainly nothing criminally wrong.
> 
> ...


Are you on a nonce forum as well as urban or something?


----------



## killer b (Mar 30, 2021)

the polling is pretty clear: more than 50% of the country think he's a sweaty nonce, 40% or so think he might be a sweaty nonce, and 6% think he isn't a sweaty nonce, and all of those 6% should be on a fucking register.


----------



## likesfish (Mar 30, 2021)

killer b said:


> Are you on a nonce forum as well as urban or something?


 nah quora possibly acutually has an nonce problem havnt really gone looking for questionable questions


----------



## killer b (Mar 30, 2021)

likesfish said:


> nah quora possibly acutually has an nonce problem havnt really gone looking for questionable questions


Looks like it has a nonce problem mate. Those are not normal opinions on the 'Prince Andrew nonce or not?' question.


----------



## MickiQ (Mar 30, 2021)

likesfish said:


> You obviously hang with half decent human beings I quote and lots of variations of this shite.
> Prince Andrew is guilty of nothing worse than exercising poor judgement. Certainly nothing criminally wrong. I quote this bullshit and similar variations
> Prince Andrew is guilty of nothing worse than exercising poor judgement. Certainly nothing criminally wrong.
> 
> ...


All of this would seem to be true, he hasn't done anything illegal or criminal, he has just been a massive creep that must make people in the same room feel like they need a shower but no actual crimes have been committed. His massive fucking arrogance and sense of entitlement that he so adroitly demonstated in his interview didn't win him many friends either. I really doubt he will face any consequence other than lack of face now, I doubt Maxwell has anything on him either or at least not solidly provable anyway, Her word alone won't be enough to convict someone in his position, there will need to be hard proof. She might know stuff but I don't think she can prove stuff or I would have expected her  to sing like a canary by now.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 30, 2021)

On the issue of age, Virginia Guiffre was 17 when she was trafficked to the U.K. to shag him. The trafficking part was Epstein and Maxwell’s crime. Having been trafficked Ms Guiffre was a prostitute and having sex with a 17 year old prostitute in the U.K. is a crime, even if unknowingly. Not sure if it were when he done done it.


----------



## MickiQ (Mar 30, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> On the issue of age, Virginia Guiffre was 17 when she was trafficked to the U.K. to shag him. The trafficking part was Epstein and Maxwell’s crime. Having been trafficked Ms Guiffre was a prostitute and having sex with a 17 year old prostitute in the U.K. is a crime, even if unknowingly. Not sure if it were when he done done it.


Even if it was illegal at the time it was 20 years ago and it comes down to her word against his, even setting aside the whole Prince of The Realm thing, it's not likely the CPS would decide to do anything.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 30, 2021)

Of course not, but it is another welcome nail in the coffin of that miserable house.


----------



## MickiQ (Mar 30, 2021)

Oh I think him and  the Sussexes have hammered a few nails in the coffin lid but I still think abolition of them is a couple of generations of,f not in my lifetime but I like to think that one day my grandson will be sat there in the pub and raise a glass to me.
"Grandad Mick was right about these fuckers all along, rest in peace Grandad"


----------



## Saul Goodman (Mar 31, 2021)

likesfish said:


> You obviously hang with half decent human beings I quote and lots of variations of this shite.
> Prince Andrew is guilty of nothing worse than exercising poor judgement. Certainly nothing criminally wrong. I quote this bullshit and similar variations
> Prince Andrew is guilty of nothing worse than exercising poor judgement. Certainly nothing criminally wrong.
> 
> ...


Did you give up the job as a screw and become a professional nonce apologist?


----------



## bmd (Mar 31, 2021)

killer b said:


> the polling is pretty clear: more than 50% of the country think he's a sweaty nonce, 40% or so think he might be a sweaty nonce, and 6% think he isn't a sweaty nonce, and all of those 6% should be on a fucking register.



The 6% are simply sweaty and therefore object to the association.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Mar 31, 2021)

bmd said:


> The 6% are simply nonces and therefore object to the association.


CFY


----------



## likesfish (Mar 31, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> Did you give up the job as a screw and become a professional nonce apologist?


Just seen this SHITE way too often 🤬


----------



## brogdale (Apr 11, 2021)

obvs fake, but made me giggle...


----------



## gosub (Apr 11, 2021)

brogdale said:


> obvs fake, but made me giggle...




turns out it was Phillip who said "over my dead body" to the the idea of him doing another interview


----------



## Sasaferrato (Apr 12, 2021)

Whether Andrew broke the law is immaterial.

His behavior was vile, and he should not have any place whatever in UK public life.

What a clusterfuck the Queen's children have been, with the exception of Edward.

I can just imagine the late D of Es comments when he heard about Andrew, it would have been along the lines of 'What the fuck next?'


----------



## Orang Utan (Apr 12, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> Whether Andrew broke the law is immaterial


How so?


----------



## Sasaferrato (Apr 12, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> How so?



See post 3035, saves me typing. What I mean't was that whether he is guilty of anything or not, he has no place in public life.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Apr 12, 2021)

He was older than every African countries independence


----------



## DaveCinzano (Apr 12, 2021)




----------



## Wilf (Apr 12, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> Whether Andrew broke the law is immaterial.
> 
> His behavior was vile, and he should not have any place whatever in UK public life.
> 
> ...


From what I remember, the duke was accused of bullying edward over his failed military career.


----------



## tim (Apr 14, 2021)

He'll be Admiral Andy at the funeral. He's been stamping his foot
Prince Andrew to wear military attire for Prince Philip's funeral


----------



## killer b (Apr 14, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> See post 3035, saves me typing. What I mean't was that whether he is guilty of anything or not, he has no place in public life.


none of them do.


----------



## killer b (Apr 14, 2021)

As sas correctly identifies here:


Sasaferrato said:


> What a clusterfuck the Queen's children have been, with the exception of Edward.


Surely one good argument for their abolishment is that they're just really shit. They're just terrible at the one job they were born into unimaginable luxury to do.


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Apr 14, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> See post 3035, saves me typing. What I mean't was that whether he is guilty of anything or not, he has no place in public life.



His "place" is a nice cosy prison cell.


----------



## Orang Utan (Apr 14, 2021)

killer b said:


> As sas correctly identifies here:
> 
> Surely one good argument for their abolishment is that they're just really shit. They're just terrible at the one job they were born into unimaginable luxury to do.


Although I can’t quite figure out exactly what the job is. They have certainly failed if it’s just to be an example to the rest of us


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 14, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> Although I can’t quite figure out exactly what the job is. They have certainly failed if it’s just to be an example to the rest of us


An example of what not to be, and as that they do a grand job


----------



## Orang Utan (Apr 14, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> An example of what not to be, and as that they do a grand job


But I’m sure there are much cheaper alternatives


----------



## killer b (Apr 14, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> Although I can’t quite figure out exactly what the job is.


smile nicely for the camera, cut ribbons, wear a gold hat. Otherwise just keep your fucking head down.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 14, 2021)

tim said:


> He'll be Admiral Andy at the funeral. He's been stamping his foot
> Prince Andrew to wear military attire for Prince Philip's funeral




Who wouldn't want to don fancy dress for their dad's funeral? I reckon coming as that bloke riding an ostrich would be more fun though.


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Apr 14, 2021)

The whole institution is just fucking bizarre.  Because of accidents of birth, a family live in ridiculous luxury with the rest of the country supposed to bow and scrape to them.  They do no work, they have no purpose.  They turn up at events where they are treated like gods, they occasionally make a speech, and certain sycophantic idiots consider that to be "work".  The queen is widely praised for her life of duty - but what duty?  What has she actually done?  What difference has she made to anything?  And she manages to look as miserable as sin all the time, while living in the lap of luxury at the expense of us drones.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Apr 14, 2021)

ElizabethofYork said:


> His "place" is a nice cosy prison cell.


I don't see that happening, not that it would be undeserved.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 14, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> But I’m sure there are much cheaper alternatives


Yes. But sadly the prevailing view is "you pay for quality" even though the Jacobite line would be markedly cheaper


----------



## MrSki (Apr 14, 2021)




----------



## Border Reiver (Apr 14, 2021)

ElizabethofYork said:


> The whole institution is just fucking bizarre.  Because of accidents of birth, a family live in ridiculous luxury with the rest of the country supposed to bow and scrape to them.  They do no work, they have no purpose.  They turn up at events where they are treated like gods, they occasionally make a speech, and certain sycophantic idiots consider that to be "work".  The queen is widely praised for her life of duty - but what duty?  What has she actually done?  What difference has she made to anything?  And she manages to look as miserable as sin all the time, while living in the lap of luxury at the expense of us drones.


You are of course entitled to your opinion. You do need to deal with the dissonance caused by the apparent democratic support for the monarchy.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> You are of course entitled to your opinion. You do need to deal with the dissonance caused by the apparent democratic support for the monarchy.


What does this mean?


----------



## killer b (Apr 14, 2021)

S☼I said:


> What does this mean?


I think it means_ I love the taste of dogshit_


----------



## brogdale (Apr 14, 2021)

S☼I said:


> What does this mean?


I suspect that they think that they've told ElizabethofYork that some people love our _dear old queen, _and that she has to get over it.
Or some such arrogant tosh.


----------



## MickiQ (Apr 14, 2021)

MrSki said:


>



Surely Pizza Express (By Royal Appointment) of all places will close as a mark of respect.


----------



## Border Reiver (Apr 14, 2021)

S☼I said:


> What does this mean?


How does one deal with an undemocratic ideal.


----------



## Teaboy (Apr 14, 2021)

I do think a lot of people like the Queen.  It should not be mistaken for fondness of the monarchy.  It's not unusual for people to wax lyrical about the Queen and then slag off _the rest of them_ and the entire concept of a royal family.

Interesting times ahead when she carks it and she knows it.


----------



## souljacker (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> How does one deal with an undemocratic ideal.


----------



## Border Reiver (Apr 14, 2021)

Teaboy said:


> I do think a lot of people like the Queen.  It should not be mistaken for fondness of the monarchy.  It's not unusual for people to wax lyrical about the Queen and then slag off _the rest of them_ and the entire concept of a royal family.
> 
> Interesting times ahead when she carks it and she knows it.


We shall see😀


----------



## Border Reiver (Apr 14, 2021)

souljacker said:


>


So you think that the democratic will should be ignored? Interesting!


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> You are of course entitled to your opinion.



Thank you.  But it's not just "opinion" is it?  I've only stated facts.


----------



## Border Reiver (Apr 14, 2021)

ElizabethofYork said:


> Thank you.  But it's not just "opinion" is it?  I've only stated facts.


You seem to have a problem separating belief from fact.


----------



## souljacker (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> So you think that the democratic will should be ignored? Interesting!



It was undemocratic a minute ago. Make your mind up.


----------



## emanymton (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> You seem to have a problem separating belief from fact.


I belive you are a bit if a knob, and that's a fact.


----------



## Border Reiver (Apr 14, 2021)

emanymton said:


> I belive you are a bit if a knob, and that's a fact.


Onto ignore for abuse.


----------



## Border Reiver (Apr 14, 2021)

souljacker said:


> It was undemocratic a minute ago. Make your mind up.


It is undemocratic to ignore the rather embarrassing fact of high democratic support for the monarchy and distrust of a presidential system.


----------



## emanymton (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> Onto ignore for abuse.


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> You seem to have a problem separating belief from fact.


Really?  Which part of my post was not factual?


----------



## andysays (Apr 14, 2021)

ElizabethofYork said:


> His "place" is a nice cosy prison cell.


His place is hanging from a lamppost with a noose around his neck, along with the rest of them


----------



## Knotted (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> It is undemocratic to ignore the rather embarrassing fact of high democratic support for the monarchy and distrust of a presidential system.



You're confusing popular with democratic.


----------



## Border Reiver (Apr 14, 2021)

Knotted said:


> You're confusing popular with democratic.


Do explain the difference...


----------



## Border Reiver (Apr 14, 2021)

ElizabethofYork said:


> Really?  Which part of my post was not factual?


Most of it was opinion. Fact is decided by groups, not  individuals.


----------



## Knotted (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> Do explain the difference...



Democracy is process. Popular is just popular opinion. In a democracy you get a chance to air your views, to campaign for your side and win people over. Eg. with Brexit, popular opinion seemed to be against it until it was put to the democratic test.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> Most of it was opinion. Fact is decided by groups, not  individuals.



Well this group has decided that you're full of shit.


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> Most of it was opinion. Fact is decided by groups, not  individuals.


Can you point out the parts which are not factual please?


----------



## Storm Fox (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> It is undemocratic to ignore the rather embarrassing fact of high democratic support for the monarchy and distrust of a presidential system.



It's going to be interesting in relation to the demographic mandate when The Queen does pass on. Whether the support for Charles will be there, or if he abdicates (Very Unlikely) and William becomes King.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Apr 14, 2021)

Ha! Got my ignore in first. What a boring cunt


----------



## Border Reiver (Apr 14, 2021)

ElizabethofYork said:


> Can you point out the parts which are not factual please?


The whole institution is just fucking bizarre. PERSONAL OPINION
Because of accidents of birth, ACT OF PARLIAMENT
a family live in ridiculous luxury with the rest of the country MANY RICHER PEOPLE
supposed to bow and scrape to them. CHOUICE, NOT COMPULSORY
They do no work, they have no purpose. PERSONAL OPINION
They turn up at events where they are treated like gods, CHOICE NOT COMPULSORY
they occasionally make a speech, and certain sycophantic idiots consider that to be "work". OPINION
The queen is widely praised for her life of duty - ACTUALLY FACT!!!!
but what duty? PETSONAL OPINION
What has she actually done? PERSONAL OPINION
What difference has she made to anything? PERSONAL OPINION
And she manages to look as miserable as sin all the time, PETSONAL OPINION
 while living in the lap of luxury at the expense of us drones. PERSONAL OPINION


----------



## Knotted (Apr 14, 2021)

You have to admit, those are some pretty good personal opinions.


----------



## klang (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> So you think that the democratic will should be ignored?


errrr, yes?


----------



## Border Reiver (Apr 14, 2021)

Storm Fox said:


> It's going to be interesting in relation to the demographic mandate when The Queen does pass on. Whether the support for Charles will be there, or if he abdicates (Very Unlikely) and William becomes King.


So long as there is moderate support for the monarchy and fear of a politicised presidency, a republic is almost impossible to attain. There are bigger fish to fry.


----------



## klang (Apr 14, 2021)

surely it's not a personal opinion that she looks miserable all the time.


----------



## souljacker (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> It is undemocratic to ignore the rather embarrassing fact of high democratic support for the monarchy and distrust of a presidential system.


It's undemocratic to have a head of state who is in that position because her dad fucked her mum.


----------



## Border Reiver (Apr 14, 2021)

littleseb said:


> errrr, yes?


Fine. Unfortunately for you that is most unlikely to happen; in this matter. conservatism is overwhelming.


----------



## seeformiles (Apr 14, 2021)

tim said:


> He'll be Admiral Andy at the funeral. He's been stamping his foot
> Prince Andrew to wear military attire for Prince Philip's funeral



I reckon he’s hoping this funeral will mean some sort of PR rehabilitation - the pathetic deluded twat.


----------



## Border Reiver (Apr 14, 2021)

souljacker said:


> It's undemocratic to have a head of state who is in that position because her dad fucked her mum.


You don't understand words, do you?


----------



## Border Reiver (Apr 14, 2021)

Knotted said:


> You have to admit, those are some pretty good personal opinions.


But not facts😁


----------



## klang (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> Fine. Unfortunately for you that is most unlikely to happen; in this matter. conservatism is overwhelming.


shame


----------



## souljacker (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> You don't understand words, do you?



Not the ones you write, no.


----------



## Border Reiver (Apr 14, 2021)

littleseb said:


> shame


I am no supporter of monarchy but I do respect enduring public opinion.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 14, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> Surely Pizza Express (By Royal Appointment) of all places will close as a mark of respect.




I am led to understand that a condition of Pizza Express' Royal Warrant is that one branch is kept open 24/7, in case any other royal paedophiles need a ludicrous alibi.


----------



## Border Reiver (Apr 14, 2021)

souljacker said:


> Not the ones you write, no.


The words you misuse. Yes.


----------



## souljacker (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> The words you misuse. Yes.



Get to the point dickhead


----------



## Knotted (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> But not facts😁



This is a politics forum and politics is usually about changing things. So people state political opinion rather than just observe how things are.

Certainly around here there are people who are very dedicated to changing things, and if you're just interested in stating how things are you're not going to get on well here.

If you have reasons for keeping the monarchy beyond a belief that it's hopeless to try to get rid of it, then you should make your argument. That would be normal political, democratic discourse. In a functioning democracy minority views are still to be taken seriously.


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> But not facts😁



They ARE facts.  They live in luxury - fact.  At our expense- fact.  They don't work - fact.  They get treated like gods - fact.  The queen looks miserable  - fact.


----------



## Serge Forward (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> I am no supporter of monarchy but I do respect enduring public opinion.


So if public opinion believed that all foreigners, leftists, rebellious types, etc should be publicly executed, you'd respect that? Is there no separating right from wrong, justice from injustice, in your worldview, or is it all just a numbers game?


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Apr 14, 2021)

souljacker said:


> Get to the point dickhead


The point is just to rile everyone up, as far as I can see, and it seems to be working on more and more threads.


----------



## Border Reiver (Apr 14, 2021)

Knotted said:


> This is a politics forum and politics is usually about changing things. So people state political opinion rather than just observe how things are.
> 
> Certainly around here there are people who are very dedicated to changing things, and if you're just interested in stating how things are you're not going to get on well here.
> 
> If you have reasons for keeping the monarchy beyond a belief that it's hopeless to try to get rid of it, then you should make your argument. That would be normal political, democratic discourse. In a functioning democracy minority views are still to be taken seriously.


I am interested in the achievable.


----------



## Knotted (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> I am interested in the achievable.



Yeah, you're not going to get on well here.


----------



## Athos (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> I am a twat.


----------



## Border Reiver (Apr 14, 2021)

Serge Forward said:


> So if public opinion believed that all foreigners, leftists, rebellious types, etc should be publicly executed, you'd respect that? Is there no separating right from wrong, justice from injustice, in your worldview, or is it all just a numbers game?


Within bounds of agreed international human rights, yes.


----------



## bellaozzydog (Apr 14, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> Whether Andrew broke the law is immaterial.
> 
> His behavior was vile, and he should not have any place whatever in UK public life.
> 
> ...



Edward  what fucking incredibly low bar you have set

I ‘d be interested to know who is advising these lizards. Patently they must be ultra posh inbred scum just to get near the royals

queenie must be losing her mind now, charles is so tone deaf to reality he needs a steer. The rest are just hanging on as either “gooduns” or “villains”

who sits down and talks strategically about the royals future with them, who steers this fucking lame donkey family.


----------



## Border Reiver (Apr 14, 2021)

Knotted said:


> Yeah, you're not going to get on well here.


So much effort put into personal observations rather than debate.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> Because of accidents of birth, ACT OF PARLIAMENT


this looks factual to me, you puffed up windbag


----------



## klang (Apr 14, 2021)

who is Edward and what has he done?


----------



## Border Reiver (Apr 14, 2021)

ElizabethofYork said:


> They ARE facts.  They live in luxury - fact.  At our expense- fact.  They don't work - fact.  They get treated like gods - fact.  The queen looks miserable  - fact.


As I said.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> So much effort put into personal observations rather than debate.


that's a personal observation, and you seem to spend rather a lot of your time here engaged in personal observations rather than debate.


----------



## Knotted (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> So much effort put into personal observations rather than debate.



Personal observations are part of the debate. _That's_ perfectly normal.


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> I am no supporter of monarchy but I do respect enduring public opinion.



So you respect the opinion about you that Urbanites hold?


----------



## seeformiles (Apr 14, 2021)

littleseb said:


> who is Edward and what has he done?



Have you forgotten “It’s a Royal Knockout”? 😳


----------



## Orang Utan (Apr 14, 2021)

littleseb said:


> who is Edward and what has he done?


My brother's nephew - he's quite naughty and finds it hard to sit still


----------



## Knotted (Apr 14, 2021)

Btw, getting rid of the monarchy is perfectly achievable. Very probably won't happen as along as Liz is still on the throne, but that can't be for much longer. On Urban we talk about far more difficult things to achieve than a bit of constitutional reform.


----------



## Serge Forward (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> Within bounds of agreed international human rights, yes.


You do realise that "agreed international human rights" is a minimal standard. Governments (including the UK government) continually duck under this extremely low bar. How about aspirational standards for society as a whole? Or maybe you just prefer lowest common denominators - love the queen, read the Daily Mail, vote SNP/Labour/Tory/Lib Dem.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> Do explain the difference...


Do you actually have any friends here? Do you actually get on with anyone here? If not I fail to see why you insist on contuning to turn up.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 14, 2021)

To see how far these cunts have gone, back in 2009 there was a shock when Charles' harpist turned out to be a burgling smackhead and polite society was all in a tizzy that such a person could get so close to the prince of Wales. What seemed to leave no one fucking agog is that Charles has a harpist. What, 30-40 grand a year to have someone twang a harp as you waft past, in a world where some people die every day of starvation as they are too poor to buy food.


----------



## Orang Utan (Apr 14, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> To see how far these cunts have gone, back in 2009 there was a shock when Charles' harpist turned out to be a burgling smackhead and polite society was all in a tizzy that such a person could get so close to the prince of Wales. What seemed to leave no one fucking agog is that Charles has a harpist. What, 30-40 grand a year to have someone twang a harp as you waft past, in a world where some people die every day of starvation as they are too poor to buy food.


The Queen has her own bagpiper too




__





						Piper to the Sovereign - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 14, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> The Queen has her own bagpiper too
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It is utterly immoral, especially as it is these very people and their vile ancestors that have caused so much poverty around the globe in the first place.


----------



## Border Reiver (Apr 14, 2021)

Knotted said:


> Personal observations are part of the debate. _That's_ perfectly normal.


She claimed they were facts, denying it was opinion


----------



## Border Reiver (Apr 14, 2021)

Serge Forward said:


> You do realise that "agreed international human rights" is a minimal standard. Governments (including the UK government) continually duck under this extremely low bar. How about aspirational standards for society as a whole? Or maybe you just prefer lowest common denominators - love the queen, read the Daily Mail, vote SNP/Labour/Tory/Lib Dem.


The European Convention is pretty enforcible.


----------



## Border Reiver (Apr 14, 2021)

ElizabethofYork said:


> So you respect the opinion about you that Urbanites hold?


Silly as well as relying on opinion as fact.


----------



## Knotted (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> She claimed they were facts, denying it was opinion



There isn't a hard line between facts and opinions. (And that's a fact in my opinion.)

Talking about achievability, I'm not sure what you hope to achieve here. You're not going to change an opinion by pointing out that it's an opinion.


----------



## Border Reiver (Apr 14, 2021)

Knotted said:


> Btw, getting rid of the monarchy is perfectly achievable. Very probably won't happen as along as Liz is still on the throne, but that can't be for much longer. On Urban we talk about far more difficult things to achieve than a bit of constitutional reform.


I have nothing invested in the monarchy (I think an independent Scotland would deal with
 the matter differently as she/he has no effective lower over Scottish law)

But how would it happen. Please describe the process


----------



## Border Reiver (Apr 14, 2021)

Knotted said:


> There isn't a hard line between facts and opinions. (And that's a fact in my opinion.)
> 
> Talking about achievability, I'm not sure what you hope to achieve here. You're not going to change an opinion by pointing out that it's an opinion.


Fact and opinion differ greatly. If you do not understand the words, don't expect to be taken seriously.


----------



## Border Reiver (Apr 14, 2021)

Knotted said:


> There isn't a hard line between facts and opinions. (And that's a fact in my opinion.)
> 
> Talking about achievability, I'm not sure what you hope to achieve here. You're not going to change an opinion by pointing out that it's an opinion.


She claimed they were facts.


----------



## Knotted (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> I have nothing invested in the monarchy (I think an independent Scotland would deal with
> the matter differently as she/he has no effective lower over Scottish law)
> 
> But how would it happen. Please describe the process



Popular opinion turns against the monarchy, government under pressure offers a referendum and republicans win it. Much like Brexit. We may even see a Republican Party applying voting pressure in a similar way UKIP did, and I would suggest that a large part of the reason the public tend to favour the monarchy is lack of exposure to republican arguments.

I don't see it happening in the immediate, but I would be surprised if it doesn't happen in the next 20 years. I mean come on, just look at the state of it.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> She claimed they were facts.


They were.


----------



## Knotted (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> Fact and opinion differ greatly. If you do not understand the words, don't expect to be taken seriously.



The concepts are distinct enough, but in practice you may have a certain amount of evidence to back up your opinion. And that's why people discuss opinions. Pointing out that an opinion is an opinion is effectively just sticking your fingers in your ears.


----------



## Knotted (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> She claimed they were facts.



Yeah, I think it's best if you get over that.


----------



## Serge Forward (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> The European Convention is pretty enforcible.


And how enforceable it is, is open to debate. To say any government observes the ECHR is not saying much either, as it sets human rights at a very low bar, basic, or the best you can get with a bunch of merciless governments. Are ECHR minimum standards the best you can offer?


----------



## Saul Goodman (Apr 14, 2021)

Serge Forward said:


> And how enforceable it is, is open to debate. To say any government observes the ECHR is not saying much either, as it sets human rights at a very low bar, basic, or the best you can get with a bunch of merciless governments. Are ECHR minimum standards the best you can offer?


Enforcement was quite strict at Guantanamo bay, I hear, although not in Europe.


----------



## pesh (Apr 14, 2021)

saw 3 new pages in an hour and had higher hopes for this thread


----------



## Border Reiver (Apr 14, 2021)

Knotted said:


> Popular opinion turns against the monarchy, government under pressure offers a referendum and republicans win it. Much like Brexit. We may even see a Republican Party applying voting pressure in a similar way UKIP did, and I would suggest that a large part of the reason the public tend to favour the monarchy is lack of exposure to republican arguments.
> 
> I don't see it happening in the immediate, but I would be surprised if it doesn't happen in the next 20 years. I mean come on, just look at the state of it.


First you need popular opinion to turn; support has never fallen below 60%. Then you need a government willing to sacrifice a considerable amount of its legislative time and political capital. It would have to be a non Tory government and that is unlikely in itself. Then it needs to get past the Lords as the Salisbury Convention would not apply. Then you need to design a replacement presidency and legislate for the powers of the crown to be determined with those of the president. Then there would probably have to be a confirmatory referendum.

Cloud cuckoo land.


----------



## Border Reiver (Apr 14, 2021)

Serge Forward said:


> And how enforceable it is, is open to debate. To say any government observes the ECHR is not saying much either, as it sets human rights at a very low bar, basic, or the best you can get with a bunch of merciless governments. Are ECHR minimum standards the best you can offer?



They are probably the strongest set in the whole world.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> First you need popular opinion to turn; support has never fallen below 60%. Then you need a government willing to sacrifice a considerable amount of its legislative time and political capital. It would have to be a non Tory government and that is unlikely in itself. Then it needs to get past the Lords as the Salisbury Convention would not apply. Then you need to design a replacement presidency and legislate for the powers of the crown to be determined with those of the president. Then there would probably have to be a confirmatory referendum.
> 
> Our cuckoo land.


Is that what the Russians did?


----------



## Saul Goodman (Apr 14, 2021)

pesh said:


> saw 3 new pages in an hour and had higher hopes for this thread


Give it time.


----------



## Knotted (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> First you need popular opinion to turn; support has never fallen below 60%. Then you need a government willing to sacrifice a considerable amount of its legislative time and political capital. It would have to be a non Tory government and that is unlikely in itself. Then it needs to get past the Lords as the Salisbury Convention would not apply. Then you need to design a replacement presidency and legislate for the powers of the crown to be determined with those of the president. Then there would probably have to be a confirmatory referendum.
> 
> Our cuckoo land.



I'm really not a buff on constitutional affairs, so you're probably right. As I'm looking at a time frame of about 20 years, I think we will see a Labour government within that sort of time frame, along with a popular republican discourse. Didn't realise that support for the monarchy has (in the past?) fallen to 60% though. I actually thought it was more popular than that, and the indicators are that it's popularity is about to fall possibly quite drastically when Charles becomes king.

To be honest I want to see the moribund monarchy drag on as an embarrassment to the British state rather swap it for whatever constitutional stitch up of a republic would come about via legislation (although I would still favour its abolition).

But here we are discussing the future like our opinions matter .


----------



## Serge Forward (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> They are probably the strongest set in the whole world.


So if ECHR is probably the strongest set of human rights in the world, what does that tell you about the world, the status quo you are so supportive of? In the case of monarchy, the rights of a member of the royal family are vastly preferential to the rights of your average member of the public. Where does the universality of human rights fit in with such a set up?


----------



## Storm Fox (Apr 14, 2021)

1


ElizabethofYork said:


> They ARE facts.  They live in luxury - fact.  At our expense- fact.  They don't work - fact.  They get treated like gods - fact.  The queen looks miserable  - fact.


She does look miserable given that fact 1,2 and 4,5 are true and number 5 increasingly so. To the work she does must be pretty hard. I mean she does have to talk Bojo the clown once a week. I mean that must cut her some slack.  
TBF I can't image the work she does it that hard. It would actually be good to know, without the toadying interviews stating how great she is.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 14, 2021)

She probably has a lot of stuff to get through but it's all just signing and approving and hand-waving and rubber stamping. All utterly meaningless. I can imagine that gets pretty dry after however many decades of doing it. Still, if she doesn't like it she could always just abdicate like that nazi uncle of hers.


----------



## Wilf (Apr 14, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Who wouldn't want to don fancy dress for their dad's funeral? I reckon coming as that bloke riding an ostrich would be more fun though.


Please don't cheapen Bernie Clifton's reputation by associating him with this bunch.


----------



## Wilf (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> Onto ignore for abuse.


You've got quite an ignore list for someone who's been here, lol, 2 weeks.

Oh, and can I go on it as well, if I tell you to fuck off?


----------



## Wilf (Apr 14, 2021)

seeformiles said:


> I reckon he’s hoping this funeral will mean some sort of PR rehabilitation - the pathetic deluded twat.


That's _Admiral _pathetic deluded twat.


----------



## Wilf (Apr 14, 2021)

littleseb said:


> who is Edward and what has he done?


He _nearly _got a job back in the 80s.


----------



## Wilf (Apr 14, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> The Queen has her own bagpiper too
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Wonder what you do all day if you are Bagpiper to the Sovereign? You can't spend all your time bagpiping as somebody would kill you making that racket all the time - but royalist bosses wouldn't let you doss around playing on your phone either.  Is there some 'any other duties' clause in the contract?  Cleaning up corgi shit? Supporting Philip's racism legacy?


----------



## Saul Goodman (Apr 14, 2021)

Wilf said:


> Wonder what you do all day if you are Bagpiper to the Sovereign? You can't spend all your time bagpiping as somebody would kill you making that racket all the time - but royalist bosses wouldn't let you doss around playing on your phone either.  Is there some 'any other duties' clause in the contract?  Cleaning up corgi shit? Supporting Philip's racism legacy?


He probably has to own up to Brenda's farts.


----------



## Storm Fox (Apr 14, 2021)

Momentary derail, but does anyone else watch 'The Windsors' The Windsors (TV Series 2016– ) - IMDb It one of my guilty watches, but I find it very funny.


----------



## MickiQ (Apr 14, 2021)

Wilf said:


> Wonder what you do all day if you are Bagpiper to the Sovereign? You can't spend all your time bagpiping as somebody would kill you making that racket all the time - but royalist bosses wouldn't let you doss around playing on your phone either.  Is there some 'any other duties' clause in the contract?  Cleaning up corgi shit? Supporting Philip's racism legacy?


I reckon this could be the coolest job ever, if your neighbours call the Plod on you for practising at 4am in the morning you could probably have them arrested


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 14, 2021)

Wilf said:


> Wonder what you do all day if you are Bagpiper to the Sovereign? You can't spend all your time bagpiping as somebody would kill you making that racket all the time - but royalist bosses wouldn't let you doss around playing on your phone either.  Is there some 'any other duties' clause in the contract?  Cleaning up corgi shit? Supporting Philip's racism legacy?


Drinking

If you look up the stats I think you'll find heavy drinking is common in the bagpiping community


----------



## Saul Goodman (Apr 14, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> Drinking
> 
> If you look up the stats I think you'll find heavy drinking is common in the bagpiping community


I think having to listen to that fucking din every day would turn anyone to drink.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 14, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> I think having to listen to that fucking din every day would turn anyone to drink.


Common in the bagpiping community and their neighbours


----------



## MickiQ (Apr 14, 2021)

Storm Fox said:


> Momentary derail, but does anyone else watch 'The Windsors' The Windsors (TV Series 2016– ) - IMDb It one of my guilty watches, but I find it very funny.


Yes love it, especially Harry Enfield, he makes a better Chucky than the real one. The only missed note was their Donald Trump, the real one was/is just so fucking loony that any caricature seemed pale by comparison


----------



## Border Reiver (Apr 14, 2021)

Serge Forward said:


> So if ECHR is probably the strongest set of human rights in the world, what does that tell you about the world, the status quo you are so supportive of? In the case of monarchy, the rights of a member of the royal family are vastly preferential to the rights of your average member of the public. Where does the universality of human rights fit in with such a set up?


Don't let perfection be the enemy of the good.


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Apr 14, 2021)

Storm Fox said:


> Momentary derail, but does anyone else watch 'The Windsors' The Windsors (TV Series 2016– ) - IMDb It one of my guilty watches, but I find it very funny.



Yes, I love it.  Especially Beatrice and Eugenie.


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Apr 14, 2021)

ElizabethofYork said:


> Yes, I love it.  Especially Beatrice and Eugenie.


They are my favourites too.


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Apr 14, 2021)

Wilf said:


> Wonder what you do all day if you are Bagpiper to the Sovereign? You can't spend all your time bagpiping as somebody would kill you making that racket all the time - but royalist bosses wouldn't let you doss around playing on your phone either.  Is there some 'any other duties' clause in the contract?  Cleaning up corgi shit? Supporting Philip's racism legacy?



Not only is it a real job, but the queen mother _also _had her own Bagpiper.  Piper to the Sovereign - Wikipedia


----------



## Dystopiary (Apr 14, 2021)

Wilf said:


> You've got quite an ignore list for someone who's been here, lol, 2 weeks.
> 
> Oh, and can I go on it as well, if I tell you to fuck off?


Nobody seems to actually get ignored after being told that though. "Onto ignore" then replied to, over and over. Apparently when they've "cooled down" or start behaving like an adult, or similar patronising sneers. But they don't get ignored.


----------



## Orang Utan (Apr 14, 2021)

ElizabethofYork said:


> Not only is it a real job, but the queen mother _also _had her own Bagpiper.  Piper to the Sovereign - Wikipedia


That’s what I posted. The Sovereign is the Queen and the Queen Mother is long dead


----------



## maomao (Apr 14, 2021)

Dystopiary said:


> Nobody seems to actually get ignored after being told that though. "Onto ignore" then replied to, over and over. Apparently when they've "cooled down" or start behaving like an adult, or similar patronising sneers. But they don't get ignored.


To be fair this is the standard protocol for use of the ignore function on u75.


----------



## Border Reiver (Apr 14, 2021)

maomao said:


> To be fair this is the standard protocol for use of the ignore function on u75.


That is how I use it.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Apr 14, 2021)

Dystopiary said:


> Nobody seems to actually get ignored after being told that though. "Onto ignore" then replied to, over and over. Apparently when they've "cooled down" or start behaving like an adult, or similar patronising sneers. But they don't get ignored.


You can always judge a person based on their use (or pretend use) of the ignore function.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 14, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> I can just imagine the late D of Es comments when he heard about Andrew, it would have been along the lines of 'What the fuck next?'



Probably more like, 'A nonce eh? That reminds me of dear old Uncle Dickie. And myself, come to think of it."


----------



## Dystopiary (Apr 14, 2021)

maomao said:


> To be fair this is the standard protocol for use of the ignore function on u75.


Ah.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> That is how I use it.



Oh, so you admit that you don't actually put people on ignore, brilliant.


----------



## bellaozzydog (Apr 14, 2021)

littleseb said:


> who is Edward and what has he done?



Lympstone Commando training center Royal Marines named  their salad bar after him


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 14, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> Show ignored content?


----------



## two sheds (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> It is undemocratic to ignore the rather embarrassing fact of high democratic support for the monarchy and distrust of a presidential system.



I must have missed the Election for the Monarchy.



Not even true that "the monarchy" is popular. Only four are above 47% popularity and one of those is dead. The rest clearly do have shit all over them.









						The most popular royalty in the UK | Politics | YouGov Ratings
					

The most popular royalty in the UK according to YouGov Ratings. Popularity is based on millions of responses from the British public and YouGov's innovative survey methodology.




					yougov.co.uk


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 14, 2021)

Wilf said:


> You've got quite an ignore list for someone who's been here, lol, 2 weeks.
> 
> Oh, and can I go on it as well, if I tell you to fuck off?


You'll have to be more imaginative than that, say something like Boris Johnson shits out better arguments than you come out with, you personify what someone worse than a cunt is


----------



## Sasaferrato (Apr 14, 2021)

SpookyFrank said:


> Probably more like, 'A nonce eh? That reminds me of dear old Uncle Dickie. And myself, come to think of it."



If you have proof that the late Duke of Edinburgh was a child molester, post it. Otherwise, fuck off.


----------



## Border Reiver (Apr 14, 2021)

two sheds said:


> I must have missed the Election for the Monarchy.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



"Monarchy" has more support than a Republic.
The monarch is elected by Parliament under Acts of Parliament. Parliament has the power to elect a different monarch. It last did this at the Gloriious Revolution in the late seventeenth century.


----------



## 1927 (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> So you think that the democratic will should be ignored? Interesting!


What is this democratic will you refer to?


----------



## two sheds (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> "Monarchy" has more support than a Republic.



Who mentioned a republic? Probably more support than everyone having holes drilled in their heads, doesn't make it remotely democratic.



> The monarch is elected by Parliament under Acts of Parliament. Parliament has the power to elect a different monarch. It last did this at the Gloriious Revolution in the late seventeenth century.



Not democratic as in elected by people then. Not even democratic as in elected by anyone in the last three hundred years. Very selective definition of 'democratic' you have there.


----------



## andysays (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> "Monarchy" has more support than a Republic.
> The monarch is elected by Parliament under Acts of Parliament. Parliament has the power to elect a different monarch. *It last did this at the Gloriious Revolution in the late seventeenth century*.


But only one poster here is old enough to remember that, so it doesn't really count as an argument


----------



## Sasaferrato (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> It is undemocratic to ignore the rather embarrassing fact of high democratic support for the monarchy and distrust of a presidential system.



No, it isn't.

Democracy and monarchy are entirely different things. Democracy implies election, hereditary monarchy does not.

At present we have monarchy, in the future, that may change. Just as the police police by consent, the monarchy is by the nation's consent. If that consent is withdrawn, we will move to having a president, probably.

Edited to add:

If you want to continue here, I would suggest that you wind your neck in a tad. You are already tedious.


----------



## 1927 (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> Onto ignore for abuse.


If thats the criteria for ignoring then you'll have a pot of people on ignore!


----------



## 1927 (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> Most of it was opinion. Fact is decided by groups, not  individuals.


Eh? Facts are facts, they aren't decided by anyone!


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 14, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> If you have proof that the late Duke of Edinburgh was a child molester, post it. Otherwise, fuck off.



As an adult he commenced his grooming of a girl who had just turned 13.


----------



## brogdale (Apr 14, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> As an adult he commenced his grooming of a girl who had just turned 13.


Or, looked at in current terms...undergraduate grooms Y8 aged child.


----------



## 1927 (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> I am no supporter of monarchy but I do respect enduring public opinion.


Where do you get this idea from that the majority of the British  public are in support of the continuation of this outdated concept of monarchy?


----------



## Sasaferrato (Apr 14, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> As an adult he commenced his grooming of a girl who had just turned 13.



I think you will find that it was the other way about, the 13 year old girl decided that he was the one for her,


----------



## Sasaferrato (Apr 14, 2021)

1927 said:


> Where do you get this idea from that the majority of the British  public are in support of the continuation of this outdated concept of monarchy?



*Do people in the UK want to keep the monarchy?*
According to UK-wide polling, the majority of people are in favour of the monarchy.

The latest poll from YouGov on 8 and 9 March 2021, was taken after the Sussex’s interview. In it, 63 per cent of those surveyed across the UK wanted to keep the monarchy, while 25 per cent preferred an elected head of state.

Godless socialist rabble have a bit to wait I reckon. 

Edited to add:

That took ten seconds of Googling, not exactly got your finger on the pulse of the nation 1927 do you?


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 14, 2021)

Mrs Miggins said:


> They are my favourites too.


In the Bruce Forsyth way?


----------



## Border Reiver (Apr 14, 2021)

1927 said:


> Where do you get this idea from that the majority of the British  public are in support of the continuation of this outdated concept of monarchy?


Repeated opinion polls. Where do you get the idea that there is support for a republic?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 14, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> I think you will find that it was the other way about, the 13 year old girl decided that he was the one for her,




Jesus Sas.


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Apr 14, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> In the Bruce Forsyth way?


What other way is there?


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 14, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Jesus Sas.


He is plumbing the depths today


----------



## Border Reiver (Apr 14, 2021)

1927 said:


> Eh? Facts are facts, they aren't decided by anyone!


I suggest you study epistemology.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 14, 2021)

Mrs Miggins said:


> What other way is there?


The only way is ethics


----------



## Orang Utan (Apr 14, 2021)

Victim-blaming a child who is a future monarch. Think that might be treason. To the gallows, Sasaferrato !


----------



## cupid_stunt (Apr 14, 2021)

1927 said:


> Where do you get this idea from that the majority of the British  public are in support of the continuation of this outdated concept of monarchy?



Probably from here...



Note the big drop off, in the under 25s.









						Support for the monarchy Britain 2022, by age | Statista
					

Although the British monarchy is supported by a plurality of people across most age groups in Great Britain, it is among over 65 year-old's where the level is support is highest at 77 percent.




					www.statista.com


----------



## gosub (Apr 14, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> To see how far these cunts have gone, back in 2009 there was a shock when Charles' harpist turned out to be a burgling smackhead and polite society was all in a tizzy that such a person could get so close to the prince of Wales. What seemed to leave no one fucking agog is that Charles has a harpist. What, 30-40 grand a year to have someone twang a harp as you waft past, in a world where some people die every day of starvation as they are too poor to buy food.


Play fair 30-40k that's only a couple of packets of duchy originals


----------



## Sasaferrato (Apr 14, 2021)

cupid_stunt said:


> Probably from here...
> 
> View attachment 263260
> 
> ...



Och well, the monarchy, of which I approve, will see me out. After that, well, I don't give a fuck really.


----------



## Orang Utan (Apr 14, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> Och well, the monarchy, of which I approve, will see me out. After that, well, I don't give a fuck really.


You idiot


----------



## Sasaferrato (Apr 14, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Jesus Sas.



I am quoting what has been said by the Queen herself. I should imagine she would know better than a bunch of internet posters.


----------



## Teaboy (Apr 14, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> I am quoting what has been said by the Queen herself. I should imagine she would know better than a bunch of internet posters.



I know what you mean because I have read that as well but I think the way you phrased it suggested a child seduced an adult which is a common excuse used by a certain type of person who does a lot of register signing.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 14, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> I think you will find that it was the other way about, the 13 year old girl decided that he was the one for her,



Every once in a while your 'anachronistic old fuddy duddy' mask slips and we see the real you. It ain't a pretty sight.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Apr 14, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> You idiot



I realise you think that you are the arbiter of all thought. You aren't you are an idiot with delusions of adequacy. Piss off.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Apr 14, 2021)

SpookyFrank said:


> Every once in a while your 'anachronistic old fuddy duddy' mask slips and we see the real you. It ain't a pretty sight.



I suggest that you look it up, rather than embarrass yourself  with your ignorance.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Apr 14, 2021)

Teaboy said:


> I know what you mean because I have read that as well but I think the way you phrased it suggested a child seduced an adult which is a common excuse used by a certain type of person who does a lot of register signing.



Not for one moment was I suggesting that.


----------



## Orang Utan (Apr 14, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> I realise you think that you are the arbiter of all thought. You aren't you are an idiot with delusions of adequacy. Piss off.


How is the monarchy going to see you out? Are they going to euthanise you? What difference do they make to your life? And why don’t you give a fuck about the future just cos you’re not in it?


----------



## Sasaferrato (Apr 14, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> How is the monarchy going to see you out? Are they going to euthanise you? What difference do they make to your life? And why don’t you give a fuck about the future just cos you’re not in it?



<Yawn>


----------



## 1927 (Apr 14, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> *Do people in the UK want to keep the monarchy?*
> According to UK-wide polling, the majority of people are in favour of the monarchy.
> 
> The latest poll from YouGov on 8 and 9 March 2021, was taken after the Sussex’s interview. In it, 63 per cent of those surveyed across the UK wanted to keep the monarchy, while 25 per cent preferred an elected head of state.
> ...


I remember how out of touch the polls were on Brexit! the last GE, the GE before that, and the one before that!


----------



## Orang Utan (Apr 14, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> <Yawn>


Grandad’s fallen asleep again mid conversation whilst spouting reactionary shite


----------



## Wilf (Apr 14, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> I think you will find that it was the other way about, the 13 year old girl decided that he was the one for her,


I think it's most unfortunate that you should refer to the Her Majesty as jailbait.


----------



## brogdale (Apr 14, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> Not for one moment was I suggesting that.


But you were offering up an official line that appears conveniently designed to deflect just such an accusation of the deceased.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 14, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> I am quoting what has been said by the Queen herself. I should imagine she would know better than a bunch of internet posters.



 "She choose me" is no defence to an adult sniffing around a child who has just turned 13. Any cunt tries that either in court or in public will find the immediate future none too pleasant.


----------



## 1927 (Apr 14, 2021)

cupid_stunt said:


> Probably from here...
> 
> View attachment 263260
> 
> ...


Even if that is reliable its gonna be rather interesting in a few years!


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 14, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> I suggest that you look it up, rather than embarrass yourself  with your ignorance.



Look up what, 'grooming', victim blaming' or 'nonce apologism'?


----------



## bimble (Apr 14, 2021)

"Facts are decided by groups" was brilliant, that's basically what's wrong with this poster, aside from his manner. The earth was flat when people in authority said it was flat.


----------



## two sheds (Apr 14, 2021)

bimble said:


> "Facts are decided by groups" was brilliant, that's basically what's wrong with this poster, aside from his manner. The earth was flat when people in authority said it was flat.


A Tobyjug FACT  

It does suggest that he's a bit of a twat because this group has decided he's a bit of a twat though.


----------



## brogdale (Apr 14, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> "She choose me" is no defence to an adult sniffing around a child who has just turned 13. Any cunt tries that either in court or in public will find the immediate future none too pleasant.


Almost certainly the line that the sweatless admiral would use if he ever came up before a court for his paedophilic behaviour. No doubt the Greek's uncle Dickie would have said the same of the young boys that he molested.


----------



## bimble (Apr 14, 2021)

two sheds said:


> A Tobyjug FACT
> 
> It does suggest that he's a bit of a twat because this group has decided he's a bit of a twat though.


Exactly, whilst in truth this twatness was a Fact long before he even mistakenly ended up on this website.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Apr 14, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> I think you will find that it was the other way about, the 13 year old girl decided that he was the one for her,



It was an arranged marriage. He was given permission to 'woo' her. She was 13 years old and he was 18. There was a power dynamic regardless of whether Liz developed feelings for him. Having been a 13 year old girl I can remember exactly the power dynamics involved in the attention received from older boys.

I am half tempted to check your posting history to see what  moral judgments you've made about other cultures/religions involved in arranged marriages and relationships with young girls but I won't because I already know you are a hypocrite.


----------



## two sheds (Apr 14, 2021)

bimble said:


> Exactly, whilst in truth this twatness was a Fact long before he even mistakenly ended up on this website.



He doesn't even seem to know what "the exception that proves the rule" means


----------



## brogdale (Apr 14, 2021)

What sort of a cunt wants to dress up in inappropriate military attire at an important family event?


----------



## Sasaferrato (Apr 14, 2021)

Rutita1 said:


> It was an arranged marriage. He was given permission to 'woo' her. She was 13 years old and he was 18. There was a power dynamic regardless of whether Liz developed feelings for him. Having been a 13 year old girl I can remember exactly the power dynamics involved in the attention received from older boys.
> 
> I am half tempted to check your posting history to see what  moral judgments you've made about other cultures/religions involved in arranged marriages and relationships with young girls but I won't because I already know *you are hypocrite.*



Really? Why so.?

I don't think that I have ever posted anything regarding arranged marriages.

I'm still waiting for your response.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Apr 14, 2021)

brogdale said:


> But you were offering up an official line that appears conveniently designed to deflect just such an accusation of the deceased.



God you are a fucking idiot, a contentious fucking idiot.

You know exactly what I meant, but chose to be a cunt, as usual.


----------



## brogdale (Apr 14, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> God you are a fucking idiot, a contentious fucking idiot.
> 
> You know exactly what I meant, but chose to be a cunt, as usual.


Irony dials set to...


----------



## killer b (Apr 14, 2021)

SpookyFrank said:


> Every once in a while your 'anachronistic old fuddy duddy' mask slips and we see the real you. It ain't a pretty sight.


there's no mask tbf


----------



## Sasaferrato (Apr 14, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Irony dials set to...
> 
> View attachment 263264


<Yawn> 

Actually, I have enough of your shit. Bye bye.


----------



## brogdale (Apr 14, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> <Yawn>
> 
> Actually, I have enough of your shit. Bye bye.


Sent packing by _a fucking idiot, a contentious fucking idiot?   _


----------



## BigMoaner (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> The whole institution is just fucking bizarre. PERSONAL OPINION
> Because of accidents of birth, ACT OF PARLIAMENT
> a family live in ridiculous luxury with the rest of the country MANY RICHER PEOPLE
> supposed to bow and scrape to them. CHOUICE, NOT COMPULSORY
> ...


You put more effort into that than I did my entire afternoons work.


----------



## brogdale (Apr 14, 2021)

Talking about matters military...


----------



## Argonia (Apr 14, 2021)

What does Prince Edward do with his time? We never hear about him.


----------



## BigMoaner (Apr 14, 2021)

Argonia said:


> What does Prince Edward do with his time? We never hear about him.


Paddy Power in lewisham


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 14, 2021)

Argonia said:


> What does Prince Edward do with his time? We never hear about him.



Potters about, occasionally seen in the bar of the Beefeater in Bagshot, nips to the bog when it's his round.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Apr 14, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Potters about, occasionally seen in the bar of the Beefeater in Bagshot, *nips to the bog when it's his round*.



I didn't know he was Scottish.


----------



## Argonia (Apr 14, 2021)

I thought he did something amorphous and rubbish in the perfoming arts. What a fucking parasite.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 14, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> I didn't know he was Scottish.



He’s the next Duke of Edinburgh.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 14, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> I think you will find that it was the other way about, the 13 year old girl decided that he was the one for her,


That’s the trouble when one is a fine upstanding citizen and these temptress Lolitas trick one, isn’t it?


----------



## MickiQ (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> "Monarchy" has more support than a Republic.
> The monarch is elected by Parliament under Acts of Parliament. Parliament has the power to elect a different monarch. It last did this at the Gloriious Revolution in the late seventeenth century.


William of Orange wasn't so much elected as got the job as a result of wheeler dealing amongst Parliament (which at the time wasn't a particularly democratic institution) bit like Gordon Brown really. The last elected King (as in there was selection to choose from) was  Harold II and look what happened to him.


----------



## Orang Utan (Apr 14, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> <Yawn>
> 
> Actually, I have enough of your shit. Bye bye.


Has he gone? Can we get the bunting out?


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 14, 2021)

killer b said:


> there's no mask tbf


Like in the king in yellow


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 14, 2021)

BigMoaner said:


> You put more effort into that than I did my entire afternoons work.


That's the urban way


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Apr 14, 2021)

Argonia said:


> I thought he did something amorphous and rubbish in the perfoming arts. What a fucking parasite.


He was a tea boy at a theatre company once.


----------



## JimW (Apr 14, 2021)

I reckon that majority support for the monarchy would crumble pretty quick if there was a serious campaign to get rid with a workable alternative, willing to bet a good half is softish benign feelings towards the current queen rather than any entrenched constitutional belief.


----------



## MickiQ (Apr 14, 2021)

I expect the monarchy to fade away over the next half century or so, sadly too long for me to see it but my grandsons probably will.  It's safe while Brenda has got her bum on the throne but whilst she is a tough old biddy even she can't live forever. Chucky's reign will be interesting I expect to see a few commonwealth members move from monarchies to republics once he has got the Golden Seat.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 14, 2021)

JimW said:


> I reckon that majority support for the monarchy would crumble pretty quick if there was a serious campaign to get rid with a workable alternative, willing to bet a good half is softish benign feelings towards the current queen rather than any entrenched constitutional belief.


They always prime the questions to make it sound like the only alternative would be a non executive President in addition to what politicians we already have.  Then everyone thinks “oh god, President Boris” (somehow forgetting we already have prime minister Boris and they don’t use that to argue against parliamentary democracy).

When one has a cancer, one cuts it out. One doesn’t have to replace it.  And that’s never explained before the poll is taken.  It’s always “would you prefer the lovely Auld Queen or an added layer of political twats like President Boris as well as a prime minister?”

Well, even I would struggle to choose there and I’m anti royalist.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Apr 14, 2021)

JimW said:


> I reckon that majority support for the monarchy would crumble pretty quick if there was a serious campaign to get rid with a workable alternative, willing to bet a good half is softish benign feelings towards the current queen rather than any entrenched constitutional belief.


Do we really need an alternative? Their only purpose is to leech wealth. All that's necessary is disbandment, an execution or two, and the division of stolen wealth.


----------



## bimble (Apr 14, 2021)

JimW said:


> I reckon that majority support for the monarchy would crumble pretty quick if there was a serious campaign to get rid with a workable alternative, willing to bet a good half is softish benign feelings towards the current queen rather than any entrenched constitutional belief.


Think so too. Maybe to be replaced by a sort of annual monarch, elected via a reality tv talent show where people can vote for their favourite.


----------



## JimW (Apr 14, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> Do we really need an alternative? Their only purpose is to leech wealth. All that's necessary is disbandment, an execution or two, and the division of stolen wealth.


Not for my money but an alternative arrangement, even if it's something like the Swiss constitutional council, because while we're still a nation state they apparently expect something to send the emails to.


----------



## JimW (Apr 14, 2021)

danny la rouge said:


> They always prime the questions to make it sound like the only alternative would be a non executive President in addition to what politicians we already have.  Then everyone thinks “oh god, President Boris” (somehow forgetting we already have prime minister Boris and they don’t use that to argue against parliamentary democracy).
> 
> When one has a cancer, one cuts it out. One doesn’t have to replace it.  And that’s never explained before the poll is taken.  It’s always “would you prefer the lovely Auld Queen or an added layer of political twats like President Boris as well as a prime minister?”
> 
> Well, even I would struggle to choose there and I’m anti royalist.


Yes, actually started typing a bit about the loaded question but it's such a tedious subject I couldn't be arsed


----------



## Espresso (Apr 14, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> Do we really need an alternative? Their only purpose is to leech wealth. All that's necessary is disbandment, an execution or two, and the division of stolen wealth.


The division of stolen wealth wouldn't get as far as you and me, though. It'd be more dough for Johnson, Sunak, Rees-Mogg and others of their ilk.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 14, 2021)

JimW said:


> Yes, actually started typing a bit about the loaded question but it's such a tedious subject I couldn't be arsed


It’s a lovely day, I’ve had a beer, and I felt like boring everyone rigid.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 14, 2021)

Espresso said:


> The division of stolen wealth wouldn't get as far as you and me, though. It'd be more dough for Johnson, Sunak, Rees-Mogg and others of their ilk.


We would melt a pound of gold and pour it down Johnson's throat. And melt it again for sunak and gove and rees-mogg etc and after a while we'd still have the pound of gold but none of the Johnson cabal


----------



## nogojones (Apr 14, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> You are of course entitled to your opinion. You do need to deal with the dissonance caused by the apparent democratic support for the monarchy.


The polls are in.....

The majority think you're a twat, yet here you are.

Are you going for the highly prized position of most people you have on ignore?


----------



## fishfinger (Apr 14, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> We would melt a pound of gold and pour it down Johnson's throat. And melt it again for sunak and gove and rees-mogg etc and after a while we'd still have the pound of gold but none of the Johnson cabal


Won't someone think of the gold smelters


----------



## nogojones (Apr 14, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> The Queen has her own bagpiper too
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'd quite like to have a personal harpist. The piper I'd just send round my mates to piss them off


----------



## brogdale (Apr 14, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Talking about matters military...



Must have been in a few more battles by the time this one was taken?


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 14, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Must have been in a few more battles by the time this one was taken?
> 
> View attachment 263325


I see he has his Butlins cap on


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 14, 2021)




----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 14, 2021)

I’m just realising purvey is probably a Scots usage. It’s the buffet or food put on at a function, especially funerals and weddings. (Emphasis on first syllable).


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 14, 2021)

danny la rouge said:


> I’m just realising purvey is probably a Scots usage. It’s the buffet or food put on at a function, especially funerals and weddings. (Emphasis on first syllable).


As opposed to pervy, which prince andrew is


----------



## MickiQ (Apr 14, 2021)

danny la rouge said:


>



I love her she's brilliant apparently even Nicola Sturgeon is a fan of her Nicola Sturgeon impressions.
As for He Who Cannot Sweat, he left the Navy with the real rank of Commander which he arguably actually earned. His promotions up to Admiral are entirely a result of who his Mum is.


----------



## killer b (Apr 14, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> he left the Navy with the real rank of Commander which he arguably actually earned.


lol


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 14, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> I love her she's brilliant apparently even Nicola Sturgeon is a fan of her Nicola Sturgeon impressions.
> As for He Who Cannot Sweat, he left the Navy with the real rank of Commander which he arguably actually earned. His promotions up to Admiral are entirely a result of who his Mum is.


Appropriately he is a vice admiral, no other rank would better suit him


----------



## Yossarian (Apr 14, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Must have been in a few more battles by the time this one was taken?
> 
> View attachment 263325



"Why do these cowardly British noblemen have so few medals?"


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 14, 2021)

danny la rouge said:


> I’m just realising purvey is probably a Scots usage. It’s the buffet or food put on at a function, especially funerals and weddings. (Emphasis on first syllable).



I thought the grammar was bad and they meant disappointing area of London, Purley.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 14, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> As for He Who Cannot Sweat, he left the Navy with the real rank of Commander which he arguably actually earned. His promotions up to Admiral are entirely a result of who his Mum is.



His mum never let him become full admiral cos of him shagging minors supplied by a convicted paedophile. With no hint of irony she said cos of his sleazy behaviour he must remain a vice admiral.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 14, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I thought the grammar was bad and they meant disappointing area of London, Purley.


Is that where the Kings and Queens live?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 14, 2021)

danny la rouge said:


> Is that where the Kings and Queens live?



No, but the people of Purley are just as odd as the Pearly bunch and both sets are best ignored.


----------



## two sheds (Apr 14, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> His mum never let him become full admiral cos of him shagging minors supplied by a convicted paedophile. With no hint of irony she said cos of his sleazy behaviour he must remain a vice admiral.


I wonder if any of them were Good Conduct Medals.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 14, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> No, but the people of Purley are just as odd as the Pearly bunch and both sets are best ignored.


Which does the vitimin-fortified soft drink come from?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 14, 2021)

danny la rouge said:


> Which does the vitimin-fortified soft drink come from?



Neither, Buckfast Abbey is in Devon. My sis in law goes there for Easter mass, the pious twat.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 14, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Neither, Buckfast Abbey is in Devon.


Evil stuff.

Don’t be twee, drink El D.


----------



## UrbaneFox (Apr 14, 2021)

"The principal duty was to play in the gardens of Clarence House at 9am for 15 minutes on three mornings per week, and at state events as requested. There was no payment for these duties and the appointment was considered to be an honour."

Official bagpiper, unpaid. How can someone stoop so low?


----------



## 1927 (Apr 15, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> His mum never let him become full admiral cos of him shagging minors supplied by a convicted paedophile. With no hint of irony she said cos of his sleazy behaviour he must remain a vice admiral.


Not true actually. He was made up to a vice admiral in 2015 and was due t become an Admiral last year on his 60th birthday, HE chose to defer his promotion due to his current self imposed step back from royal duties.


----------



## gosub (Apr 15, 2021)

brogdale said:


> What sort of a cunt wants to dress up in inappropriate military attire at an important family event?
> 
> View attachment 263263



What sort of cunt invites 'them' to their daughters 18th birthday


----------



## kittyP (Apr 15, 2021)

danny la rouge said:


>




The love reaction was for Janey Godley. 
I absolutely love her, 
Her facebook videos, especially the chats with her and comedian daughter Ashely Storrie, have kept me going in lockdown.


----------



## Sue (Apr 15, 2021)

1927 said:


> Not true actually. He was made up to a vice admiral in 2015 and was due t become an Admiral last year on his 60th birthday, HE chose to defer his promotion due to his current self imposed step back from royal duties.


Did he not leave the Navy decades ago? So how can he get promoted when he doesn't work there anymore? It's like me discovering I'm now the manager of the supermarket I stopped working at in 1990... 🤷‍♀️


----------



## DaveCinzano (Apr 15, 2021)

Sue said:


> Did he not leave the Navy decades ago? So how can he get promoted when he doesn't work there anymore? It's like me discovering I'm now the manager of the supermarket I stopped working at in 1990... 🤷‍♀️


Any chance you can use your time travelling supermarket management heft to square me away some boxes of Marathons and big bags of Opal Fruits (preferably at 1990 prices)?


----------



## RedRedRose (Apr 15, 2021)

Knotted said:


> Popular opinion turns against the monarchy, government under pressure offers a referendum and republicans win it. Much like Brexit. We may even see a Republican Party applying voting pressure in a similar way UKIP did, and I would suggest that a large part of the reason the public tend to favour the monarchy is lack of exposure to republican arguments.
> 
> I don't see it happening in the immediate, but I would be surprised if it doesn't happen in the next 20 years. I mean come on, just look at the state of it.


I must confess, as a life-long republican, I have never felt as excited about the prospects of getting rid of the royals as I do now. They have faltered and need a helping shove to put them on their way.

As I see it, currently 15 or 16 countries recognise Elizabeth as their sovereign. I suspect immediately prior, or very close to Elizabeth disembarking, that number may further decline. If one of the big countries, say Australia or Canada, ditch her, it could be the impetus and loss of prestige required to move Britain in the right direction also.


----------



## andysays (Apr 15, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> I think you will find that it was the other way about, the 13 year old girl decided that he was the one for her,


That defence might have worked when you were a young man, but most people now see it for the bullshit it is.


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 15, 2021)

Top of p. 106 :



pesh said:


> saw 3 new pages in an hour and had higher hopes for this thread



Seven new ones, in my case 

It it worth catching up later??  

Quick spoilers welcome


----------



## brogdale (Apr 15, 2021)

gosub said:


> What sort of cunt invites 'them' to their daughters 18th birthday


One with shared 'interests'?


----------



## gosub (Apr 15, 2021)

1927 said:


> Not true actually. He was made up to a vice admiral in 2015 and was due t become an Admiral last year on his 60th birthday, HE chose to defer his promotion due to his current self imposed step back from royal duties.


In this country England it is good to kill an admiral from time to time, to encourage the others.


----------



## souljacker (Apr 15, 2021)

William of Walworth said:


> Top of p. 106 :
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It was mainly this new clown poster we have, border something or other, shitting all over the thread with nonsense. Nothing to see really. I made some good points obv.


----------



## MathFabMathonwy (Apr 15, 2021)

tim said:


> He'll be Admiral Andy at the funeral. He's been stamping his foot
> Prince Andrew to wear military attire for Prince Philip's funeral



That means he gets to Roger the Cabinboy!


----------



## Idris2002 (Apr 15, 2021)

RedRedRose said:


> I must confess, as a life-long republican, I have never felt as excited about the prospects of getting rid of the royals as I do now. They have faltered and need a helping shove to put them on their way.
> 
> As I see it, currently 15 or 16 countries recognise Elizabeth as their sovereign. I suspect immediately prior, or very close to Elizabeth disembarking, that number may further decline. If one of the big countries, say Australia or Canada, ditch her, it could be the impetus and loss of prestige required to move Britain in the right direction also.


I can't see Canada ditching the crown any time soon - it would open up a huge can of constitutional worms, putting Quebec independence back on the agenda, and leaving the First Nations in an even more untenable situation, and maybe even reviving Western Canada separatism as a force.


----------



## MickiQ (Apr 15, 2021)

RedRedRose said:


> I must confess, as a life-long republican, I have never felt as excited about the prospects of getting rid of the royals as I do now. They have faltered and need a helping shove to put them on their way.
> 
> As I see it, currently 15 or 16 countries recognise Elizabeth as their sovereign. I suspect immediately prior, or very close to Elizabeth disembarking, that number may further decline. If one of the big countries, say Australia or Canada, ditch her, it could be the impetus and loss of prestige required to move Britain in the right direction also.


It's 16 but will soon be 15 as Barbados aims to become as republic by November this year, Of the remainder the important ones are Australia, Canada and New Zealand (plus us of course) the rest are mostly little islands except for Jamaica and Papua New Guinea. 
Brenda has been there so long that major reform has become unthinkable whilst she still breathes. She was on the throne when I was born, I'm a year or two from retirement and she's still there. Chucky taking over will be the trigger for change I'm sure. We're stuck with the Royals at least until the death of Billy the Bald (who I am convinced has a very good chance of being the last ever English King) but a few years into Chucky's reign (and let's face it, it's not likely to be all that long) most of the other countries will have dropped the monarchy.
My money is on Australia being the first of the Big Three being the one to drop him.


----------



## CNT36 (Apr 15, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Neither, Buckfast Abbey is in Devon. My sis in law goes there for Easter mass, the pious twat.


I think we went there for an Easter egg hunt once. It was shit.


----------



## Wilf (Apr 15, 2021)

If the nonce is trying to sneak back into 'public life', it would be worth labour asking whether he has a DBS check.  He clearly won't have as they don't bother with stuff like legal process or paying taxes, but would be a good way of embarrassing both johnson and the nonce himself.  Of course starmer won't do anything of the kind as he's busy fawning, bowing and flag humping.  At one level it would be a political stunt to ask the question, but also a reminder of the staggering situation where an alleged sex offender will be going round meeting the public, young people etc.


----------



## gosub (Apr 15, 2021)

tim said:


> He'll be Admiral Andy at the funeral. He's been stamping his foot
> Prince Andrew to wear military attire for Prince Philip's funeral



I can sort of understand Prince Andrew's frustration with ths whole rehabilitation thing....Its not like he was mates with Jimmy Saville


----------



## Wilf (Apr 15, 2021)

gosub said:


> I can sort of understand Prince Andrew's frustration with ths whole rehabilitation thing....Its not like he was mates with Jimmy Saville


Surprised he doesn't want to wear a track suit at the funeral.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 15, 2021)

Wilf said:


> Surprised he doesn't want to wear a track suit at the funeral.


he should do, if he has to make a break for it it'll be easier to run in that than an admiral's uniform with a sword tangling his legs


----------



## Saul Goodman (Apr 15, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> I think you will find that it was the other way about, the 13 year old girl decided that he was the one for her,


Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, you've heard evidence from Prince Paedo that it was, in fact, he who was seduced by the 13 year old child.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Apr 15, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, you've heard evidence from Prince Paedo that it was, in fact, he who was seduced by the 13 year old child.


Idiot.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Apr 15, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> Idiot.


Paedo apologist.


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 15, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:
			
		

> I think you will find that it was the other way about, the 13 year old girl decided that he was the one for her,






			
				Saul Goodman said:
			
		

> Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, you've heard evidence from Prince Paedo that it was, in fact, he who was seduced by the 13 year old child.





Sasaferrato said:


> Idiot.



I get this vague feeling Sas, that Saul just might have been taking the piss there


----------



## Aladdin (Apr 15, 2021)

Border Reiver said:


> I am no supporter of monarchy but I do respect enduring public opinion.


There was a time when "public opinion" led to perfectly innocent people being burned at the stake or drowned. 

Public Opinion is highly over- rated.


----------



## Serge Forward (Apr 16, 2021)

Up there with "common sense" (i.e. read the paper, watch telly, believe it all, vote for a politician every 5 years, trust the boss, don't join a union, follow orders, do what the police tell you to do, don't walk on the grass, etc).


----------



## Argonia (Apr 21, 2021)

A woman has been detained under the Mental Health Act after trespassing on Andrew's home.









						Prince Andrew: Woman held after trespass report at Royal Lodge
					

A woman is sectioned under the Mental Health Act after police are called to his residence in Windsor.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## DaveCinzano (Apr 24, 2021)

Prosecutors are continuing to give Ghislaine Maxwell a taste of that American pile-'em-high-make-'em-plead style of charge-escalation:









						Ghislaine Maxwell makes first in-person court appearance since arrest
					

Former girlfriend of Jeffrey Epstein appears in blue scrubs in court in Manhattan, and pleads not guilty to sex-trafficking charges




					www.theguardian.com
				






> On 29 March, a new indictment brought two more charges – sex trafficking conspiracy and sex trafficking of a minor.
> 
> The new indictment also expands the number of accusers: there are now four “minor victims” listed, up from three. The new indictment also extends the timeframe of Maxwell’s alleged participation in Epstein’s abuse by seven years, to between 1994 and 2004 rather than 1994 to 1997.
> 
> Maxwell, 59, maintains her innocence. On Friday, she pleaded not guilty to the two new counts.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 27, 2021)

Seems the Grand old Duke of York has set up a business called Lincelles, he has a business partner, just the one, a chap called Harry Keogh, an old friend, they go way back, Keogh attended Eugenie’s wedding. Which happened to be the same year that he was forced to resign from Coutts Bank after claims against him for sexual assault, sexual harassment and general lewd behaviour to such a degree that women at the bank refused to work with him.

Dashed unfortunate that yet another close friend turns out to be a nonce, almost as if Andrew is cursed to spend his life surrounded by sex pests, the poor sweaty non-admiral.


----------



## Santino (Apr 27, 2021)

L' Incelles - the new aftershave from Chanel. For men who go their own way.


----------



## Idris2002 (Apr 27, 2021)

Santino said:


> L' Incelles - the new aftershave from Chanel. For men who go their own way.


The great smell of Brute.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 27, 2021)




----------



## brogdale (Apr 27, 2021)

Santino said:


> L' Incelles - the new aftershave from Chanel. For men who go their own way.


Follow-up line to be called _N'Once; "just one spray is enough"_


----------



## MickiQ (Apr 27, 2021)

Santino said:


> L' Incelles - the new aftershave from Chanel. For men who go their own way.


smells like pizza dough


----------



## dessiato (Apr 27, 2021)

DaveCinzano said:


> Prosecutors are continuing to give Ghislaine Maxwell a taste of that American pile-'em-high-make-'em-plead style of charge-escalation:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Is that minor as in underage, or as in not so important?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 27, 2021)

dessiato said:


> Is that minor as in underage, or as in not so important?



Underage. A child.


----------



## dessiato (Apr 27, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Underage. A child.


That's what I thought, but you cannot be sure with these reports.


----------



## Wilf (Apr 27, 2021)

Fucking _incels_, you really couldn't make this up!

So, if I've got the timeline right, _after _the royal nonce does his car crash interview about his noncery, he sets up a business with the banking nonce.  Pretty much like carrying his association with the epstein nonce after he'd been inside.  Well, that's some PR strategy....


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Apr 27, 2021)

Wilf said:


> Fucking _incels_, you really couldn't make this up!
> 
> So, if I've got the timeline right, _after _the royal nonce does his car crash interview about his noncery, he sets up a business with the banking nonce.  Pretty much like carrying his association with the epstein nonce after he'd been inside.  Well, that's some PR strategy....



Thick as shit and full of entitlement.  What a combination!


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Apr 27, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Dashed unfortunate that yet another close friend turns out to be a nonce, almost as if Andrew is cursed to spend his life surrounded by sex pests, the poor sweaty non-admiral.





Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## Argonia (May 1, 2021)

Woking Pizza Express are advertising for a waiter vacancy. Maybe Sweaty Nonce could apply - imagine him doing a day's work.



			https://uk.indeed.com/jobs?q=pizza%20express&l=Woking&vjk=92fdffa99bb526e9
		


Your role in our team

You’re the face of PizzaExpress and we want you to be yourself. We don’t want any robots here, just people who care about delivering great service and creating memorable experiences for our customers. You’ll use your passions and interests to fuel moments of connection and make every customer’s visit special.


----------



## Spanner (May 3, 2021)

Sugar Kane said:


> There was a time when "public opinion" led to perfectly innocent people being burned at the stake or drowned.
> 
> Public Opinion is highly over- rated.


Whose opinions are correctly-rated?


----------



## krtek a houby (May 3, 2021)

Spanner said:


> Whose opinions are correctly-rated?



Certainly not royalists, apologists for royalists or conspiracy theorist types.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 4, 2021)

Spanner said:


> Whose opinions are correctly-rated?


Yours, at zero


----------



## MrSki (May 6, 2021)




----------



## Spanner (May 8, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> Yours, at zero


Better than yours, at least


----------



## krtek a houby (May 8, 2021)

Spanner said:


> Better than yours, at least



5 days to gestate that response. Disappointing.

Your heart's just not in this, is it?


----------



## Jay Park (May 8, 2021)

Blinding come-back an all.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 8, 2021)

Spanner said:


> Better than yours, at least


no, your opinions are worse than shit. even Boris Johnson, who declares Hitler won at Stalingrad, would be ashamed to be as ignorant as you.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 8, 2021)

krtek a houby said:


> 5 days to gestate that response. Disappointing.
> 
> Your heart's just not in this, is it?


----------



## Spanner (May 9, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> no, your opinions are worse than shit. even Boris Johnson, who declares Hitler won at Stalingrad, would be ashamed to be as ignorant as you.


Why are you so aggressive?


----------



## Saul Goodman (May 9, 2021)

Spanner said:


> Why are you so aggressive?


I think it might be something to do with you being a boring cunt? I may be wrong but I'm not.


----------



## Humberto (May 9, 2021)

Spanner said:


> Why are you so aggressive?



We take all comers here. You don't get to complain after 5 minutes though.


----------



## MrSki (May 9, 2021)

Spanner said:


> Why are you so aggressive?


Why are you a tool?


----------



## Spanner (May 9, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> I think it might be something to do with you being a boring cunt? I may be wrong but I'm not.


 Understood. Victim blaming


----------



## Spanner (May 9, 2021)

MrSki said:


> Why are you a tool?


“I’d rather be a hammer than a nail”


----------



## MrSki (May 9, 2021)

Spanner said:


> “I’d rather be a hammer than a nail”


Well why are you a spanner then?


----------



## Saul Goodman (May 9, 2021)

Spanner said:


> Understood. Victim blaming


That defense only works if you're not a cunt.


----------



## Spanner (May 9, 2021)

MrSki said:


> Why are you a tool?


You might want to revisit your tag line: “Who am I to say you’re wrong”


----------



## Saul Goodman (May 9, 2021)

Spanner said:


> You might want to revisit your tag line: “Who am I to say you’re wrong”


You may not be wrong but you're definitely a wrong 'un.


----------



## MrSki (May 9, 2021)

Spanner said:


> You might want to revisit your tag line: “Who am I to say you’re wrong”


I am not saying you are wrong just that you are a tool.


----------



## Spanner (May 9, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> That defense only works if you're not a cunt.


So says Saul “cunt” Goodman.


----------



## Humberto (May 9, 2021)

playground


----------



## Spanner (May 9, 2021)

MrSki said:


> Well why are you a spanner then?


Random username. No meaning


----------



## Spanner (May 9, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> You may not be wrong but you're definitely a wrong 'un.


You know nothing about me, Saul. Fuck off with your reverential bollocks. Who are you? Some big mouth on a small time forum


----------



## Spanner (May 9, 2021)

Humberto said:


> playground


Innit


----------



## Saul Goodman (May 9, 2021)

Spanner said:


> So says Saul “cunt” Goodman.


Fortunately, I know I'm a cunt. You seem to be having a problem accepting your lot.


----------



## Saul Goodman (May 9, 2021)

Spanner said:


> You know nothing about me, Saul. Fuck off with your reverential bollocks. Who are you? Some big mouth on a small time forum


I know you're a tool.


----------



## Humberto (May 9, 2021)

Spanner said:


> Innit



I'm criticising rather than backing you up, you dullard.


----------



## Spanner (May 9, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> Fortunately, I know I'm a cunt. You seem to be having a problem accepting your lot.


You’re not Oscar Wilde mate. You’re a bully.


----------



## Saul Goodman (May 9, 2021)

Spanner said:


> Random user. No worth.


CFY


----------



## Sue (May 9, 2021)

This is going well.


----------



## Saul Goodman (May 9, 2021)

Spanner said:


> You’re not Oscar Wilde mate. You’re a bully.


A bully? Aren't you the daft cunt who was asking for someone's address,   just lately?


----------



## Spanner (May 9, 2021)

Humberto said:


> I'm criticising rather than backing you up, you dullard.


AS IF I DIDNT REALISE.


----------



## Humberto (May 9, 2021)

Next post wins!


----------



## DaveCinzano (May 9, 2021)

Aye


----------



## Saul Goodman (May 9, 2021)

Spanner said:


> AS IF I DIDNT REALISE.


Fuck! I didn't realise you had access to CAPS LOCK! I'm outta here


----------



## Spanner (May 9, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> A bully? Aren't you the daft cunt who was asking for someone's address,   just lately?


Ladies don’t like the word “cunt” in conversation by the way. Just in case you were hoping to lose your virginity sometime soon.


----------



## Humberto (May 9, 2021)

Spanner said:


> Yes. And you said you would send yours



Well ard


----------



## Saul Goodman (May 9, 2021)

Spanner said:


> Yes. And you said you would send yours


PM incoming!


----------



## Humberto (May 9, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> PM incoming!



don't pls


----------



## Spanner (May 9, 2021)

Humberto said:


> don't pls


Don’t worry, he didn’t.


----------



## kittyP (May 9, 2021)

Spanner said:


> Ladies don’t like the word “cunt” in conversation by the way. Just in case you were hoping to lose your virginity sometime soon.



Which "ladies"?


----------



## Spanner (May 9, 2021)

kittyP said:


> Which "ladies"?


All the decent ones, Kitty. If you disagree, call your mum and say, “hello you old cunt, how are you?”


----------



## Saul Goodman (May 9, 2021)

Spanner said:


> Don’t worry, he didn’t.


Try again.


----------



## Aladdin (May 9, 2021)

Spanner said:


> All the decent ones, Kitty. If you disagree, call your mum and say, “hello you old cunt, how are you?”




So...you're a lady?


----------



## InfoBurner (May 9, 2021)

It's after 12 and Spanner's need for social flagellation must be fulfilled ...

It's...


----------



## Sue (May 9, 2021)

Spanner said:


> All the decent ones, Kitty. If you disagree, call your mum and say, “hello you old cunt, how are you?”


All the decent ladies? I fear you may not be a lady, kittyP, never mind a _decent_ one. The horror.


----------



## Sue (May 9, 2021)

I must say I am loving Spanner's work. There truly is something for everyone!


----------



## kittyP (May 9, 2021)

Spanner said:


> All the decent ones, Kitty. If you disagree, call your mum and say, “hello you old cunt, how are you?”



My mum has heard me use that word on many occasions.
Are you saying both my mum and I are "not decent" when you have no idea who I am?

The reason I asked the question was because I don't like people speaking on behalf of all women, especially when they call us ladies.


----------



## krtek a houby (May 9, 2021)

Sugar Kane said:


> So...you're a lady?



And the late Prince Phil was his father, apparently


----------



## Saul Goodman (May 9, 2021)

krtek a houby said:


> And the late Prince Phil was his father, apparently


His own father?


----------



## krtek a houby (May 9, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> His own father?



Sorry, Spanner's father or mother.  I forget already.


----------



## krtek a houby (May 9, 2021)

Spanner said:


> You know nothing about me, Saul. Fuck off with your reverential bollocks. Who are you? Some big mouth on a small time forum



This isn't the first time you've slagged off urban. If you hate it here and hate the posters because they don't meet your imperious standards, why hang around?


----------



## Jay Park (May 9, 2021)

Mind your manners, he's King George Spanner'yull


----------



## Aladdin (May 9, 2021)

krtek a houby said:


> Sorry, Spanner's father or mother.  I forget already.




Spanner sings this daily...


----------



## maomao (May 9, 2021)

Spanner said:


> “I’d rather be a hammer than a nail”



Spanner being appropriate but wrong because you're definitely a fucking nut.

Everyone enjoying hurling abuse at you on these boards has made constructive and friendly posts on these boards at some point. Even Saul. However, you just turn up a couple of times a week for a slanging match. Stop accusing everyone else of playground behaviour; your entire posting history is a slanging match.


----------



## maomao (May 9, 2021)

Jay Park said:


> Mind your manners, he's King George Spanner'yull


The dog breed you are thinking of is the Cavalier King _Charles_ Spaniel. Not that it would have been funny if you'd got it right.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 9, 2021)

Spanner said:


> Why are you so aggressive?


you fell down the stupid tree and smacked your head on every branch in your tumble.


----------



## Jay Park (May 9, 2021)

maomao said:


> The dog breed you are thinking of is the Cavalier King _Charles_ Spaniel. Not that it would have been funny if you'd got it right.



ouch


----------



## flypanam (May 9, 2021)

Bill Gates’s hanging out with Jeffrey Epstein is partly a reason for his divorce from Melinda 








						Melinda Gates Was Meeting With Divorce Lawyers Since 2019 to End Marriage With Bill Gates
					

The philanthropist had discussions with lawyers in October 2019 around when Bill Gates’s ties to Jeffrey Epstein became public.




					www.wsj.com


----------



## kenny g (May 9, 2021)

flypanam said:


> Bill Gates’s hanging out with Jeffrey Epstein is partly a reason for his divorce from Melinda
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Hardly. That article is thin as fuck


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 9, 2021)

Spanner said:


> Why are you so aggressive?



Because it's fun.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 9, 2021)

Spanner said:


> Ladies don’t like the word “cunt” in conversation by the way. Just in case you were hoping to lose your virginity sometime soon.



They're called "women", not "ladies", you passive-aggressive patriarchal arse-nugget.


----------



## Jay Park (May 10, 2021)

Can someone repost Patches O'Houlahan flinging wrenches at people in 'Dodgeball' plz


----------



## Spanner (May 14, 2021)

ViolentPanda said:


> They're called "women", not "ladies", you passive-aggressive patriarchal arse-nugget.


If people like you spent more time trying to change things that actually mattered, we wouldn’t need people like you to whinge about words you don’t like. Arse nugget? You’ve betrayed your class.


----------



## Jay Park (May 14, 2021)

Spanner said:


> If people like you spent more time trying to change things that actually mattered, we wouldn’t need people like you to whinge about words you don’t like. Arse nugget? You’ve betrayed your class.



hoi polloi


----------



## Spanner (May 14, 2021)

kittyP said:


> My mum has heard me use that word on many occasions.
> Are you saying both my mum and I are "not decent" when you have no idea who I am?
> 
> The reason I asked the question was because I don't like people speaking on behalf of all women, especially when they call us ladies.


Ok, men don’t like hearing “ladies” swearing like squaddies. We find it disgusting.


----------



## two sheds (May 14, 2021)

Bit of a twat aren't you 

Talking to a woman like that is disgusting.


----------



## Spanner (May 14, 2021)

Jay Park said:


> hoi polloi


Does “hoi polloi” mean: he’s got a job?


----------



## Spanner (May 14, 2021)

two sheds said:


> Bit of a twat aren't you
> 
> Talking to a woman like that is disgusting.


Come on two sheds. Prove yourself. 1. Twat. 2. Disgusting.


----------



## Spanner (May 14, 2021)

two sheds said:


> Bit of a twat aren't you
> 
> Talking to a woman like that is disgusting.


Put up or shut up, you “Arse Nugget”.


----------



## Calamity1971 (May 14, 2021)

Spanner said:


> We find it disgusting.


Is that the royal we? 
You absolute fucking bellend. 
Don't talk to two sheds like that it makes me very very cross


----------



## Spanner (May 14, 2021)

It’s the ‘we’ that we all used to be a few years ago.


----------



## Spanner (May 14, 2021)

Calamity1971 said:


> Is that the royal we?
> You absolute fucking bellend.
> Don't talk to two sheds like that it makes me very very cross


Why am I an absolute fucking bellend?


----------



## Calamity1971 (May 14, 2021)

Spanner said:


> It’s the ‘we’ that we all used to be a few years ago.


Eh?


----------



## Calamity1971 (May 14, 2021)

Spanner said:


> Why am I an absolute fucking bellend,


Only you can answer that. Or ex friends might be able to enlighten you.


----------



## dessiato (May 14, 2021)

Spanner said:


> Ok, men don’t like hearing “ladies” swearing like squaddies. We find it disgusting.


Personally I don't care whether a woman swears or not. I don't care if she calls people a cunt or not.

What I do care about is whether she is a decent, interesting person all round. The same as I care about whether a man is a decent, interesting person all round.

My wife can swear enough to melt the paint off the walls. She's still the person I most like to be with. (And she is, literally, a lady)

Do not presume that men don't like women who swear.


----------



## Spanner (May 14, 2021)

Calamity1971 said:


> Only you can answer that. Or ex friends might be able to enlighten you.


Is that the best you’ve got?


----------



## Calamity1971 (May 14, 2021)

Spanner said:


> Is that the best you’ve got?


You're boring me now.


----------



## Spanner (May 14, 2021)

dessiato said:


> Personally I don't care whether a woman swears or not. I don't care if she calls people a cunt or not.
> 
> What I do care about is whether she is a decent, interesting person all round. The same as I care about whether a man is a decent, interesting person all round.
> 
> ...


 Well done Mr Perfect. 


Calamity1971 said:


> You're boring me now.


Nighty night


----------



## kittyP (May 14, 2021)

Spanner said:


> Ok, men don’t like hearing “ladies” swearing like squaddies. We find it disgusting.



Which men?


----------



## Mation (May 14, 2021)

I've just re-listened to all of the Trololo song to find that the closest he gets is tralala


----------



## muscovyduck (May 14, 2021)

Considering the nature of the thread I'm not sure a man describing what men like/don't like to see in women is appropriate?


----------



## krtek a houby (May 14, 2021)

Spanner said:


> Ok, men don’t like hearing “ladies” swearing like squaddies. We find it disgusting.



Are you posting from the Victorian era? 

You denigrate this site and its posters and then tell people what they can and can't say.

Why on earth are you here? Did you lose a bet or something?


----------



## andysays (May 14, 2021)

Spanner said:


> Ok, men don’t like hearing “ladies” swearing like squaddies. We find it disgusting.


#NotAllMen


----------



## ElizabethofYork (May 14, 2021)

Spanner said:


> Ok, men don’t like hearing “ladies” swearing like squaddies. We find it disgusting.



What about lady squaddies?  Are they allowed to swear?


----------



## MrSki (May 14, 2021)

Spanner is JRM & I claim my £5.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 14, 2021)

Spanner said:


> Why am I an absolute fucking bellend?


Years of hard work would be my guess


----------



## Pickman's model (May 14, 2021)

Spanner said:


> It’s the ‘we’ that we all used to be a few years ago.


You came from a pool of spunk and an egg and it's a great pity the two ever met


----------



## editor (May 14, 2021)

Spanner said:


> Is that the best you’ve got?


You're now banned from this thread. See statement 1 of the FAQ.


----------



## Argonia (May 14, 2021)

My heart sinks when I get an alert that Spanner has posted on a royal thread


----------



## RedRedRose (May 14, 2021)

First person on ignore  the sheer tedium!


----------



## editor (May 14, 2021)

Note: That last warning tipped him in to an auto temp ban. 
Oh dear, never mind.


----------



## gosub (May 16, 2021)

Prince Andrew quietly removed as patron of almost 50 organisations  1 in 4 which is a lot less than you would think it would be


----------



## Pickman's model (May 16, 2021)

gosub said:


> Prince Andrew quietly removed as patron of almost 50 organisations  1 in 4 which is a lot less than you would think it would be


If only he was just quietly removed and  Kremlin  royal watchers only surmised his fate by pizza express reducing their royal warrant count by one


----------



## krtek a houby (May 16, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> If only he was just quietly removed and  Kremlin  royal watchers only surmised his fate by pizza express reducing their royal warrant count by one



Quietly would probably suffice, but surely in these dark times, perhaps such a removal could be televised to cheer everyone up?

_It's a Royal Nonce Out _or something.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 16, 2021)

krtek a houby said:


> Quietly would probably suffice, but surely in these dark times, perhaps such a removal could be televised to cheer everyone up?
> 
> _It's a Royal Nonce Out _or something.


I think it'd be nice if he were quietly taken out and drowned in a barrel of wine or piss or whatnot and no one noticed he was gone for months

A fitting end for someone so keen on the limelight


----------



## kenny g (May 16, 2021)

RedRedRose said:


> First person on ignore  the sheer tedium!


I have a few and not surprisingly they are the most commonly ignored as well. The prolific and pointless.


----------



## Argonia (May 16, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> I think it'd be nice if he were quietly taken out and drowned in a barrel of wine or piss or whatnot and no one noticed he was gone for months
> 
> A fitting end for someone so keen on the limelight



Drowned in a vat of Malmsey wine like the Duke of Clarence in 1478


----------



## dessiato (May 16, 2021)

If he is to be drowned, could it not be in a bucket of sewage?


----------



## Part 2 (Jun 15, 2021)

Nonce protesting in media city this evening


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Jun 15, 2021)

Argonia said:


> Drowned in a vat of Malmsey wine like the Duke of Clarence in 1478


More like the Duke of claret .

Though I guess it's long pork so both red or white is acceptable.


----------



## Argonia (Jun 16, 2021)

So when's Andrew's trial beginning now we've got a separation of powers between executive and an independent judiciary? He's not going to slip away to Argentina like Josef Mengele is he?


----------



## Argonia (Jun 16, 2021)

I think out of all of them 'Michael Gove's trial will be the most fascinating of all of them. But I won;t be watching. I'll be looking at something beautiful instead - reading good old Kafka's "The Trial" and laughing at Richard Dawkins's failure to understand literature. I saw Dawkins on his bike in Oxford when I failed to study history there and he always looked really pissed off for some reason.  And I wonder - are genes really selfish?





__





						Kafka The Trial - Google Search
					





					www.google.com


----------



## brogdale (Jun 16, 2021)

Channel 4 ran, what they termed as an ‘Exclusive’, piece last night on the Met’s failure to investigate multiple allegations of Epstein & Maxwell’s sexual abuse of minors and vulnerable,young adults in London.

Revealed: Epstein and Maxwell implicated in multiple UK abuse claims over a decade

The report explicitly asked to what extent the Met’s decision not to investigate was based upon the alleged involvement of Andrew Windsor.


----------



## andysays (Jun 16, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Channel 4 ran, what they termed as an ‘Exclusive’, piece last night on the Met’s failure to investigate multiple allegations of Epstein & Maxwell’s sexual abuse of minors and vulnerable,young adults in London.
> 
> Revealed: Epstein and Maxwell implicated in multiple UK abuse claims over a decade
> 
> The report explicitly asked to what extent the Met’s decision not to investigate was based upon the alleged involvement of Andrew Windsor.


TBF, as recent events have reminded us, it's just as likely to be the result of internal Met corruption which has nothing to do with His Royal Nonceness.


----------



## MickiQ (Jun 16, 2021)

It doesn't necessarily follow as corruption so much as not  being willing to stick heads above the parapets. If Plod had investigated He Who Cannot Sweat and found nothing then it's probably a career ending move for whoever led it. 
It would take a brave Plod to accuse a member of the Royal Family of a serious crime without solid upfront evidence which they didn't have. He was able to hide behind his position without even having to try to do so.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 16, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> It doesn't necessarily follow as corruption so much as not  being willing to stick heads above the parapets. If Plod had investigated He Who Cannot Sweat and found nothing then it's probably a career ending move for whoever led it.
> It would take a brave Plod to accuse a member of the Royal Family of a serious crime without solid upfront evidence which they didn't have. He was able to hide behind his position without even having to try to do so.


The issue raised by C4News was not about evidence of Windsor's wrong-doing, but that they'd decided against any investigation of the actually existing testimony & allegations of Epstein/Maxwell's abusive behaviour in London which forms the basis of some of the US case against Maxwell.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 20, 2021)




----------



## Argonia (Jun 20, 2021)

teqniq said:


>



Is she one of the poor old 1000 women he has had penetrated with his infinitseimally small Napoleon sized member whilst videoing it for his own personal pleasure later and adding to the Windsor's behemoth stash of DIY porn?


----------



## teqniq (Jun 20, 2021)

It's Rosie Holt, an actress who does satire.


----------



## Argonia (Jun 20, 2021)

teqniq said:


> It's Rosie Holt, an actress who does satire.


Hopefully she managed to steer clear of him then. He's been as loose as wonderful old Sir James Saville. I wonder if Saville was inspired when he met the Windsors and received his little gong for services to charity and pederasty. I wonder if glorious Emperor Caligula Philip Fred West fixed it for good old Jimmy to get the keys to Broadmoor psychiatric hospital.


----------



## Argonia (Jun 20, 2021)

The trial of Andrew will be fascinating but gruelling viewing. The poor sap's mind will be so scrambled - just like Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson - he might just have not a single sad little word to say for himself. If found guilty his prison cell is going to be a most feotid and squalid litttle place. Hope he slops out properly in his little toilet in the corner and hope he doesn't just spend his time remembering the good old days and masturbating all over the dark green walls. 

Will the guards let him have reading material or will they just tell him to lie on his bunk all day long with no one to talk to and not a thing to read and not a single little friend in the entire universe? And how is he going to deal with the bed bugs biting him every night extracting his blue royal blood and gorging upon him? Will his John Nash beautiful mind reflect on Charles Stuart's tyranny, the divine right of kings, and the victory of Cromwell and the New Model Army or has he never heard of them? Will he weep hot tears as he remembers Sarah Ferguson and tries to recall her book Budgie the Helicopter? 

And how is he going to cope without having an hour of exercise break on the Oscar Wilde treadmill and not having any light coming into the cell from the outside? The hours will pass by one after another. Sisyphus will roll the stone up the hill and the stone will come tumbling down the hill again like tumbleweed and Sisyphus will have to wake up the morning and roll the stone up the hill all over again. Nobody will ever think about him again and he will be buried in an unmarked grave or in the sea like Osama Bin Laden. No one will ever visit the grave because nobody will eve know where it is. He will be written out of history as an enormous and giant absence and a complete and utter nothing and nobody. 

Meanwhile outside the Republic will flourish but he will never hear any voices from it through the bars. He will never manage to figure out how to escape like the good old boys getting out of Colditz. His John Nash brilliant mind will just never even begin to figure out how to get out of his own private Alcatraz. What incredible fun the old boy has lying ahead of him. He'll probably laugh his way down into the trapdoor and into his watery grave deep in the flooor of the Indian Ocean. 

He can jolly well swim with the fishes and the octopi and the jellyfish and the Great White sharks and the alligators, the grand old duke with his 10,000 men and his 1000 notches in the bedpost. As he finally dies he might think to himself - if only I had been a simple waiter at Woking Pizza Express and done a proper day's work in my life seving customers and being a kind and decent man in the local community. Will he be sweating furiously and thinking about the Belgrano going down in the evil of the Falklands war as he finally slips away?


----------



## Argonia (Jun 21, 2021)

Come on hopelss Plod. Cuff him up.


----------



## dessiato (Jun 21, 2021)

One thing here that I like about the royal family is that the emeritus king is being investigated for his dodgy dealings, (whether he goes to court is another matter) and the Infanta Cristina’s husband was tried, found guilty, and is doing time for corruption. I don’t imagine this could happen in the U.K. where the royals are seen as above the law. (Except when speeding)


----------



## Argonia (Jun 21, 2021)

dessiato said:


> One thing here that I like about the royal family is that the emeritus king is being investigated for his dodgy dealings, (whether he goes to court is another matter) and the Infanta Cristina’s husband was tried, found guilty, and is doing time for corruption. I don’t imagine this could happen in the U.K. where the royals are seen as above the law. (Except when speeding)


Poor old potentates. They have no idea what on earth is about to hit them. The Republic is safe and born and free from Emperor Phlip Caligula Adolf Hitler's abuse. Let them go to their trials and their prison cells if found guilty by an independent judiciary  the whole lot of them. Solitary confinement.


----------



## tim (Jun 21, 2021)

dessiato said:


> One thing here that I like about the royal family is that the emeritus king is being investigated for his dodgy dealings, (whether he goes to court is another matter) and the Infanta Cristina’s husband was tried, found guilty, and is doing time for corruption. I don’t imagine this could happen in the U.K. where the royals are seen as above the law. (Except when speeding)


Yes, but the Emeritus King also murdered his elder brother and got away with it, just like the much loved (if you didn't want to go to gaol) recently deceased King of Thailand did.


----------



## Argonia (Jun 22, 2021)

07.19 am in the New Republic. Still not arrested I see.


----------



## Argonia (Jun 22, 2021)

Nope,nothing


----------



## Argonia (Jun 23, 2021)

Nope. Absolutely nothing. Jolly good show Plod.









						Home - BBC News
					

Visit BBC News for up-to-the-minute news, breaking news, video, audio and feature stories. BBC News provides trusted World and UK news as well as local and regional perspectives. Also entertainment, business, science, technology and health news.




					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## Argonia (Jun 24, 2021)

Still not a peep. Shall I phone Crimestoppers?

*








						Contact the police
					

Need to contact us? For non-emergency (101) contact with the police, please use our online form.




					www.police.uk
				




*


----------



## Argonia (Jun 26, 2021)

Nothing at all


----------



## Argonia (Jun 27, 2021)

Absolutely nothing.


----------



## xenon (Jun 27, 2021)

Erm, are you alright chief?


----------



## Argonia (Jun 27, 2021)

xenon said:


> Erm, are you alright chief?


Perfectly fine thanks. Are you alright?


----------



## xenon (Jun 27, 2021)

Argonia said:


> Perfectly fine thanks. Are you alright?



copasetic


----------



## Argonia (Jun 27, 2021)

xenon said:


> copasetic


Glad to hear it and thanks for the word. When I passed the entrance exam to Oxford in 1995 my writing was full of unusual language and that's what attracted the tutors. But it's all gone. I just speak plain English now like Orwell in "Politics and the English Language".


----------



## Argonia (Jun 27, 2021)

18:20. Nothing.

Just a story about the failed Ministry of Defence (which should have been titled the Ministry of War as it used to be) leaving documents at a bus stop.









						Home - BBC News
					

Visit BBC News for up-to-the-minute news, breaking news, video, audio and feature stories. BBC News provides trusted World and UK news as well as local and regional perspectives. Also entertainment, business, science, technology and health news.




					www.bbc.co.uk
				












						War Office - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Argonia (Jun 28, 2021)

Andrew has 259 thousand followers at Twitter. Fortunately he doesn't see to have tweeted to his deluded followers since 2019 when he wrote a pathetic letter about his friendship with Epstein and said he was no longer doing his ghastly royal duties. Fortunately the Republic have 29,000 and are catching up and outflanking fast. I went for a job at Republic and gave them a 26 page document but they didn't give me the job so I had to go back to cleaning churches for a living and writing on the side.



			https://twitter.com/thedukeofyork?lang=en
		


@RepublicStaff


----------



## Argonia (Jul 2, 2021)

The Canadians are tearing down statues of Queen Victoria and Queen Elizabeth II









						Statues of Queen Victoria and Queen Elizabeth II torn down in Canada
					

Monuments are torn down in Manitoba at a protest over the deaths of indigenous Canadian children.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 2, 2021)

Is he in an orange jumpsuit and locked in the darkened bowels of Matt grey C130 yet ?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 2, 2021)

I suppose we should deal with our own recidivist sex offenders rather than waiting for the Uncle Sam rendition express to come a calling


----------



## Argonia (Jul 2, 2021)

not-bono-ever said:


> Is he in an orange jumpsuit and locked in the darkened bowels of Matt grey C130 yet ?


----------



## Argonia (Jul 3, 2021)

In Thomas Edison's much-quoted remark, from around 1903, “Genius is one per cent *inspiration*, ninety-nine per cent *perspiration*.” Another version of this idea, attributed to George Bernard Shaw, alters the proportions to “ninety per cent *perspiration*, ten per cent *inspiration*”





__





						DEFINE_ME
					





					www.thelancet.com


----------



## equationgirl (Jul 3, 2021)

Argonia said:


> In Thomas Edison's much-quoted remark, from around 1903, “Genius is one per cent *inspiration*, ninety-nine per cent *perspiration*.” Another version of this idea, attributed to George Bernard Shaw, alters the proportions to “ninety per cent *perspiration*, ten per cent *inspiration*”
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Which is relevant how?


----------



## Argonia (Jul 3, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> Which is relevant how?


Sweating equationgirl









						Prince Andrew: I’m innocent because I can’t sweat. Dermatologists: Oh, really?
					

In defending himself from sexual assault allegations, Prince Andrew claimed the presented scenario is false because he couldn't sweat




					nationalpost.com
				




Dr. Mark Lupin, a dermatologist who acts as a clinical instructor at the University of British Columbia, said he was skeptical.

“It is implausible to the point of being impossible that an ‘overdose of adrenaline’ could cause a persistent inability to sweat; there are no human studies nor is there reasonable science to back up this claim,” said Lupin in an email to the Post. “The claim that an overdose of adrenaline has led to the inability to sweat does not make sense.”


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 3, 2021)

Argonia said:


> In Thomas Edison's much-quoted remark, from around 1903, “Genius is one per cent *inspiration*, ninety-nine per cent *perspiration*.” Another version of this idea, attributed to George Bernard Shaw, alters the proportions to “ninety per cent *perspiration*, ten per cent *inspiration*”
> 
> 
> 
> ...


In Thomas Edison's case it was 1% inspiration 99% plagiarism


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jul 3, 2021)

Argonia said:


> Sweating


He'll be sweating profusely until Maxwell 'tops herself' or otherwise gets silenced.


----------



## Argonia (Jul 3, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> He'll be sweating profusely until Maxwell 'tops herself' or otherwise gets silenced.


There's a bid going in for the Bill Cosby treatment









						Ghislaine Maxwell's lawyers cite Bill Cosby release and call her case 'similar'
					

Lawyers for Ghislaine Maxwell said the 'same principle' applies to her two days after Bill Cosby's sexual assault conviction was overturned




					metro.co.uk


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jul 3, 2021)

Argonia said:


> There's a bid going in for the Bill Cosby treatment
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'm pretty sure Epstein's deal didn't cover New York. How he got the deal in the first place is beyond belief, or it would be if he didn't have very low friends* in very high places.

*People he filmed having sex with underage girls


----------



## Argonia (Jul 4, 2021)

Virginia Giuffre 

@VRSVirginia

CEO of Victims Refuse Silence. A non-profit organisation aimed to assist victims of human trafficking. I Survived Epstein, Maxwell & Co- now for accountability.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 4, 2021)

Argonia said:


> There's a bid going in for the Bill Cosby treatment
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So, to use the supposed promise that was given to epstein's ‘potential co-conspirators’, she has to in fact *be *an epstein ‘potential co-conspirators’.  Not a great line for the defence to take, even with the word 'potential' in there.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 5, 2021)

Wilf said:


> So, to use the supposed promise that was given to epstein's ‘potential co-conspirators’, she has to in fact *be *an epstein ‘potential co-conspirators’.  Not a great line for the defence to take, even with the word 'potential' in there.



Epstein's deal was overturned in any case, which is why he ended up back in jail.


----------



## Argonia (Jul 5, 2021)

No word from poor old Virginia yet but I'm hoping she gets back to me


----------



## Johnny Doe (Jul 6, 2021)

My 6 year old has to self isolate as his mate at school tested positive. First bit of homework - draw your favourite member of the Royal Family. Who do you reckon?


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jul 6, 2021)

Harry Smiles said:


> My 6 year old has to self isolate as his mate at school tested positive. First bit of homework - draw your favourite member of the Royal Family. Who do you reckon?


Davros.


----------



## Johnny Doe (Jul 6, 2021)

Once he'd chosen and insisted, I said why don't you draw him somewhere you love, hoping he'd choose Pizza Express


----------



## equationgirl (Jul 6, 2021)

Argonia said:


> No word from poor old Virginia yet but I'm hoping she gets back to me


Why did you contact her?


----------



## belboid (Jul 6, 2021)

Harry Smiles said:


> My 6 year old has to self isolate as his mate at school tested positive. First bit of homework - draw your favourite member of the Royal Family. Who do you reckon?


Copy this un


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jul 6, 2021)

Harry Smiles said:


> Once he'd chosen and insisted, I said why don't you draw him somewhere you love, hoping he'd choose Pizza Express


Must include sweat


----------



## Johnny Doe (Jul 6, 2021)

Harry Smiles said:


> Once he'd chosen and insisted, I said why don't you draw him somewhere you love, hoping he'd choose Pizza Express


But he went one better. I give you Prince Andrew, in the ball pit at soft play:


----------



## Sue (Jul 6, 2021)

Harry Smiles said:


> My 6 year old has to self isolate as his mate at school tested positive. First bit of homework - draw your favourite member of the Royal Family. Who do you reckon?


Is it just me or is that a really weird thing to get a six year old* to do? 

*Any year old tbh.


----------



## Johnny Doe (Jul 6, 2021)

Sue said:


> Is it just me or is that a really weird thing to get a six year old* to do?
> 
> *Any year old tbh.


They've just been on a school trip that included an open top bus ride including Buck Palace, so may be related, I guess


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 6, 2021)

Harry Smiles said:


> But he went one better. I give you Prince Andrew, in the ball pit at soft play:
> View attachment 277179


They normally don't let adults in unless they're accompanying children


----------



## brogdale (Jul 6, 2021)

Harry Smiles said:


> But he went one better. I give you Prince Andrew, in the ball pit at soft play:
> View attachment 277179


That's a really creepy face; a brilliant artistic interpretation from Smiles jnr!


----------



## Wilf (Jul 6, 2021)

Argonia said:


> No word from poor old Virginia yet but I'm hoping she gets back to me


?


----------



## Argonia (Jul 6, 2021)

Wilf said:


> ?


I tweeted her Wilf but I find Twitter pretty hopeless - people just don't listen


----------



## Argonia (Jul 6, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> Why did you contact her?


To offer her solidarity and tell her we are fighting for justice


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 6, 2021)

Argonia said:


> To offer her solidarity and tell her we are fighting for justice


i bet she gets all sorts of cranks contacting her


----------



## Argonia (Jul 6, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> i bet she gets all sorts of cranks contacting her







__





						Home - Cranks - Great Tasting Wholesome Food
					






					cranks.co.uk


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 6, 2021)

Argonia said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> ...



yeh vegetarians and other cranks


----------



## Argonia (Jul 6, 2021)

The very worst are the so-called 'journalists' at Twitter. I have tweeted Laura Kuennsberg, Adam Fleming, Robert Peston, Beth Rigby, Krishnan Guru-Murthy  and Jeremy Vine and not one of them has managed to muster up a single response. I just tweeted Katharine Viner editor of the Grauniad with a furious bollocking but doubt she will manage to get back to me.  I don't mind Virginia blanking me off as she is probably bombarded with cranks as Pickman's model points out and I wasn't too fussed about Greta Thunberg not getting back to me as she must get billions but the journalists who are failing to hold the dreadful tyrants to account should wake up and do their job.


----------



## belboid (Jul 6, 2021)

Argonia said:


> The very worst are the so-called 'journalists' at Twitter. I have tweeted Laura Kuennsberg, Adam Fleming, Robert Peston, Beth Rigby, Krishnan Guru-Murthy  and Jeremy Vine and not one of them has managed to muster up a single response. I don't mind Virginia blanking me off as she is probably bombarded with cranks as Pickman's model points out and I wasn't too fussed about Greta Thunberg not getting back to me as she must get billions but the journalists who are failing to hold the dreadful tyrants to account should wake up and do their job.


They’ve all blocked you.


----------



## Argonia (Jul 6, 2021)

belboid said:


> They’ve all blocked you.


This cesspit of a country is like a giant blocked drain. I need an over qualified hard working Polish plumber to come and do the job.









						How to Unblock a Drain - 5 Steps | Cleanipedia UK
					

Want to unblock your bathroom or kitchen sink drain and freshen up your home? This article is full of useful tips and tricks! Read on to find out more.




					www.cleanipedia.com


----------



## Aladdin (Jul 6, 2021)

Harry Smiles said:


> But he went one better. I give you Prince Andrew, in the ball pit at soft play:
> View attachment 277179




Incredible attention to detail....having the Irish Harp there an all.... 😁



Eta... am genuinely fascinated... and also wondering why there's a rabbit top right 😁


----------



## Argonia (Jul 6, 2021)

Harry Smiles said:


> But he went one better. I give you Prince Andrew, in the ball pit at soft play:
> View attachment 277179


No wonder you're always smiling Harry Smiles you've got a talented budding artist right there!


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 6, 2021)

Harry Smiles said:


> But he went one better. I give you Prince Andrew, in the ball pit at soft play:
> View attachment 277179


Are those beads of sweat on his furrowed brow?


----------



## Argonia (Jul 6, 2021)

DaveCinzano said:


> Are those beads of sweat on his furrowed brow?


----------



## kabbes (Jul 7, 2021)

Sue said:


> Is it just me or is that a really weird thing to get a six year old* to do?
> 
> *Any year old tbh.


Not if your aim  as an institution is to implant the normalisation of monarchy-worship.  Then it’s an entirely sensible thing to do.


----------



## Aladdin (Jul 7, 2021)

Sue said:


> Is it just me or is that a really weird thing to get a six year old* to do?
> 
> *Any year old tbh.




I dont think I have ever asked a child in my class to draw Mickey D.... 
Or any Irish president or indeed any politician. 
Tend to leave all politics at the door .

There was one time in 1996 when I was just starting teaching and there was a competition to design a new Irish flag. I thought it would be a nice art project. 
One kid who was normally well behaved and quiet just point blank refused to do it. And theb got very upset about the whole thing. To the extent that I gave them all something else to do and later just binned the idea. 
Found out the next day that the kid was from a local IRA family. 
😳
From then on I steered clear of all politics. Even in history class I stuck to the Stone age, the Celts, Vikings and Danes options.


----------



## RedRedRose (Jul 7, 2021)

Argonia said:


> The Canadians are tearing down statues of Queen Victoria and Queen Elizabeth II
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Hopefully, another nail in the coffin of the monarchy, but who knows?

What the BBC don't mention, as well treaties between First Nation peoples and the crown, abuse was carried out amongst others, the Church of England, whose head is the Queen of England.


----------



## Argonia (Jul 7, 2021)

RedRedRose said:


> Hopefully, another nail in the coffin of the monarchy, but who knows?
> 
> What the BBC don't mention, as well treaties between First Nation peoples and the crown, abuse was carried out amongst others, the Church of England, whose head is the Queen of England.


My right wing mum with whom I argue every day trots off to the Church of England every Sunday but I refuse to partake. Anything with Queenie as the head ain't worth a dime.





__





						Disestablishmentarianism - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Argonia (Jul 7, 2021)

Quick scan of hopeless BBC News and not a single peep, Last story was on a trespasser into his house.



			https://www.bbc.co.uk/search?q=Prince+andrew


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 7, 2021)

Argonia said:


> Quick scan of hopeless BBC News and not a single peep, Last story was on a trespasser into his house.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/search?q=Prince+andrew


Is prince Andrew dead?


----------



## Argonia (Jul 7, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> Is prince Andrew dead?


Trespasser didn't get him Unfortunately they nabbed her under the Mental Health Act instead of arresting the Prince of Darkness.









						Trespass arrests at Prince Andrew's Windsor home
					

A 29-year-old woman and a 31-year-old man are detained in the Royal Lodge grounds, police say.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## Argonia (Jul 8, 2021)

Oh dear, apparently the Prince of Darkness isn't happy. Diddums.









						Andrew fury as Zara and Peter could have demoted Beatrice and Eugenie
					

PRINCE ANDREW could have been left furious as his daughters' place in the Royal Family's line of succession may have changed after a subtle change in the law.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## dessiato (Jul 8, 2021)

Argonia said:


> Oh dear, apparently the Prince of Darkness isn't happy. Diddums.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I liked the “could have been,” to put it another way, ”we need to do a bit of rabble rousing, and have made up a story.”


----------



## Johnny Doe (Jul 8, 2021)

dessiato said:


> I liked the “could have been,” to put it another way, ”we need to do a bit of rabble rousing, and have made up a story.”


It only missing an anonymous insider really


----------



## Chilli.s (Jul 8, 2021)

Petulant royal spits dummy out over lack of free money


----------



## Argonia (Jul 8, 2021)

Harry Smiles said:


> It only missing an anonymous insider really


Did you get a selfie of your smile last night after the England win, Harry Smiles ? Must have been the size of Jupiter.


----------



## MickiQ (Jul 8, 2021)

Argonia said:


> Oh dear, apparently the Prince of Darkness isn't happy. Diddums.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Man who has led a very privileged life due to an accident of birth is complaining that his daughters who already lead a very comfortable life (they're not exactly reducing to having their UC claims stopped) are not going to have it as cushy as their old man.
I'm not gloating over this but I find it hard to feel very sympathetic either.


----------



## Argonia (Jul 8, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> Man who has led a very privileged life due to an accident of birth is complaining that his daughters who already lead a very comfortable life (they're not exactly reducing to having their UC claims stopped) are not going to have it as cushy as their old man.
> I'm not gloating over this but I find it hard to feel very sympathetic either.


5.5 million people in this appallingly governed country claim Universal Credit which is due to be cut by £20 in the autumn so the Tories can build more nuclear weapons.


----------



## MickiQ (Jul 8, 2021)

Argonia said:


> 5.5 million people in this appallingly governed country claim Universal Credit which is due to be cut by £20 in the autumn so the Tories can build more nuclear weapons.


In all fairness I don't think that is likely due to any decision by either  Princess Eugenie and/or Beatrice.


----------



## Argonia (Jul 8, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> In all fairness I don't think that is likely due to any decision by either  Princess Eugenie and/or Beatrice.


Nonsense. They called Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson on their lobster telephone and commanded him to build more nukes. That's how our authoritarian system works.

The black spider memos:









						Black spider memos - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Argonia (Jul 9, 2021)




----------



## Orang Utan (Jul 9, 2021)

stop fucking posting irrelevant youtube videos - no one’s watching them


----------



## Argonia (Jul 9, 2021)

Zorro ranch, £20m









						Epstein sex ranch which Prince Andrew allegedly visited up for sale for £20m
					

Jeffrey Epstein's New Mexico 'Zorro Ranch' is on the market after his death, as Virginia Giuffre claimed she was flown there as a teenage to meet with the Duke of York




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## equationgirl (Jul 10, 2021)

Please stop spamming threads repeatedly Argonia we've been through this.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 10, 2021)

I am very surprised to discover there's never been any chat here about lord portchester being the father of prince andrew


----------



## krtek a houby (Jul 10, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> stop fucking posting irrelevant youtube videos - no one’s watching them



Don't be so nasty


----------



## Orang Utan (Jul 10, 2021)

krtek a houby said:


> Don't be so nasty


expressing exasperation is not nasty, telling people their feelings are worthless is


----------



## krtek a houby (Jul 10, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> expressing exasperation is not nasty, telling people their feelings are worthless is



Shite trolls aren't people


----------



## Orang Utan (Jul 10, 2021)

krtek a houby said:


> Shite trolls aren't people


pretty sure they're a genuine fan who came acoss this site and got involved.


----------



## krtek a houby (Jul 10, 2021)

Genuine fanatic, sure


----------



## Dystopiary (Jul 10, 2021)

Prince Andrew’s scandals left Queen’s monarchy ‘vulnerable’

Prince Andrew has come under fire for completely stripping the Queen of her power as a ‘protector’ after scandal broke loose.

The claim has been brought forward the CEO of Republic, Graham Smith. During his interview with the _On the Republic _podcast he claimed, “The monarchy has always been highly protected well up to the 80s.”

“I mean it still is to some extent, but not to a large one. So for most of the democratic modern era, the Queen's been there, protecting. It seems to me that it's incredible vulnerable because of the damage done by Andrew.”

“As well as the impact of their poor decisions in regards to Harry and Meghan. Certainly over the last 10 years, a number of times people have said they like the Queen, but can't stand the rest of them.”

“I'd be very rich if I had a pound for every time someone said that. It's not going to fall over just like that."

He concluded by saying, “If they're left to their own devices, they will fix a crisis and cover it up and move on. That's why it's about building the momentum to push it over when the time comes. I think it's going to be a lot easier to push over when the Queen's out of the way.”


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 10, 2021)

Dystopiary said:


> Prince Andrew’s scandals left Queen’s monarchy ‘vulnerable’
> 
> Prince Andrew has come under fire for completely stripping the Queen of her power as a ‘protector’ after scandal broke loose.
> 
> ...


The only reason Republic have been heard of by anyone is that they were the feeble liberal republicans the media found when the movement against the monarchy existed


----------



## krtek a houby (Jul 11, 2021)

Still, at least some good has come out of the Nonce Andrew scandal; a weakened monarchy on its knees.

Who will deal the final blow?


----------



## Argonia (Jul 11, 2021)

Urban should pass the kitty round and buy up Zorro ranch for that 20 million failing pound sterling. We should fumigate it thoroughly, give it a thorough William Friedkin exorcism (filmed on camcorder by Republican Mark Kermode) and set up the Urban university there. I'll buy the first round in the subsidised student bar with my gold and Bitcoin. Pickman's model can have a special big bottle of Smirnoff the size of Lake Baikal for all those pamphlets he is writing.


----------



## Tankus (Aug 9, 2021)

> An alleged victim of deceased sex offender Jeffrey Epstein filed a lawsuit against Prince Andrew of Britain on Monday, accusing the embattled 61-year-old royal of sexually abusing her at Epstein’s Manhattan mansion and elsewhere when she was under the age of 18, according to the complaint.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Maybe we could do a perp  swap


			NPR Cookie Consent and Choices
		

U.S. Won't Hand Over American Diplomat's Wife Wanted In Fatal U.K. Car Crash

Seems like a good deal


----------



## MrSki (Aug 9, 2021)

Sorry wrong thread.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 9, 2021)

Is the sweaty nonce an anti vaxxer too?


----------



## Wolveryeti (Aug 10, 2021)

Epstein accuser Virginia Giuffre sues Prince Andrew
					

Giuffre accuses Andrew of sexual abuse at Epstein’s mansion when she was under 18




					www.google.com
				




Game on.


----------



## Raheem (Aug 10, 2021)

Wolveryeti said:


> Epstein accuser Virginia Giuffre sues Prince Andrew
> 
> 
> Giuffre accuses Andrew of sexual abuse at Epstein’s mansion when she was under 18
> ...


Doubt he'll be sweating it, though.


----------



## hash tag (Aug 10, 2021)

Can we not exchange him for Anne sacoolas?


----------



## MrCurry (Aug 10, 2021)

How does a civil case like that work, when it’s one person‘s word against another, 20 years after the event?  I suppose it doesn’t have to be proven with physical evidence, it’ll just be a case of persuading a jury that it happened. Even so, i wonder what evidence or witnesses she can produce in a court, or will it get settled before it ever gets to court?


----------



## ruffneck23 (Aug 10, 2021)

MrCurry said:


> How does a civil case like that work, when it’s one person‘s word against another, 20 years after the event?  I suppose it doesn’t have to be proven with physical evidence, it’ll just be a case of persuading a jury that it happened. Even so, i wonder what evidence or witnesses she can produce in a court, or will it get settled before it ever gets to court?


she might have an 'accident' before then.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 10, 2021)

MrCurry said:


> How does a civil case like that work, when it’s one person‘s word against another, 20 years after the event?  I suppose it doesn’t have to be proven with physical evidence, it’ll just be a case of persuading a jury that it happened. Even so, i wonder what evidence or witnesses she can produce in a court, or will it get settled before it ever gets to court?



Did you see his interview with Maitlis? There isn’t a jury in the world that would find in the sweaty nonce’s favour.


----------



## Reno (Aug 10, 2021)

ruffneck23 said:


> she might have an 'accident' before then.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 10, 2021)

Let's just remind ourselves of the intellectual giant that is the too-honourable nonce...


----------



## Saul Goodman (Aug 10, 2021)

MrCurry said:


> How does a civil case like that work, when it’s one person‘s word against another, 20 years after the event?  I suppose it doesn’t have to be proven with physical evidence, it’ll just be a case of persuading a jury that it happened. Even so, i wonder what evidence or witnesses she can produce in a court, or will it get settled before it ever gets to court?


Out of court settlement. Brenda won't allow the sweaty nonce to embarrass them any more than he already has.


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 10, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> Out of court settlement. Brenda won't allow the sweaty nonce to embarrass them any more than he already has.


I think they will just ignore it, an out of court settlement will be seen by many as a tacit admission of guilt. He Who Cannot Sweat is going to have to stay out of the USA for the forseeable future but unless he has assets in the USA that can be seized then there is no actual penalty for a judgement against him. There's no possible way he is going to get extradited and trying to get a judgement in an US court enforced here is going to be both expensive and complicated.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 10, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> I think they will just ignore it, an out of court settlement will be seen by many as a tacit admission of guilt. He Who Cannot Sweat is going to have to stay out of the USA for the forseeable future but unless he has assets in the USA that can be seized then there is no actual penalty for a judgement against him. There's no possible way he is going to get extradited and trying to get a judgement in an US court enforced here is going to be both expensive and complicated.


ignoring it will be seen by many as a tacit admission of guilt


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 10, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> ignoring it will be seen by many as a tacit admission of guilt


To be honest the fact that he is still breathing is seen by most people (including me) as a tacit admission of guilt so he's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. I doubt it will get ignored in the sense of the 'grey men' of the Palace sticking their fingers in their ears and going "La La We Can't Hear You" but more a case of issuing a statement along the lines of "This case has no legal standing and HRH (Non) Sweaty denies all knowledge of these accusations" and then just ignoring it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 10, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> To be honest the fact that he is still breathing is seen by most people (including me) as a tacit admission of guilt so he's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. I doubt it will get ignored in the sense of the 'grey men' of the Palace sticking their fingers in their ears and going "La La We Can't Hear You" but more a case of issuing a statement along the lines of "This case has no legal standing and HRH (Non) Sweaty denies all knowledge of these accusations" and then just ignoring it.


yes and it's that sort of ignoring it which will be taken by many as a tacit admission of guilt.

i don't remember is a very far cry from i didn't do it


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 10, 2021)

Apparently any criminal case has to go first, and the investigators on that are still wanting to interview him, as part of their ongoing investigation, so this civil case is likely to be stayed, until the criminal case is concluded, whether it ends up in court or gets dropped.

Or, maybe just left open indefinitely, to stop the civil case in it's tracks, and avoid any embarrassment.


----------



## Plumdaff (Aug 10, 2021)

The Ghislaine Maxwell trial is due to go ahead in the autumn; will be interesting to see what comes out in that/what any last-minute plea deal involves.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Aug 10, 2021)

Plumdaff said:


> The Ghislaine Maxwell trial is due to go ahead in the autumn; will be interesting to see what comes out in that/what any last-minute plea deal involves.


I reckon she'll get a time served deal, or close to it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 10, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> I reckon she'll get a time served deal, or close to it.


i hear gm much of the opinion that no noose is good noose


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 10, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> I reckon she'll get a time served deal, or close to it.




If she grasses, if not I expect her to be a very old woman before she hits the streets again.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 10, 2021)

HRH Prince Andrew wishes to make the following statement:

But she caught me on the counter (It wasn't me)
Saw me bangin' on the sofa (It wasn't me)
I even had her in the shower (It wasn't me)
She even caught me on camera (It wasn't me)
She saw the marks on my shoulder (It wasn't me)
Heard the words that I told her (It wasn't me)
Heard the scream geting louder (It wasn't me)


----------



## dylanredefined (Aug 10, 2021)

Is rape by being so stupidly arrogant as to believe the woman really wanted me a thing?


----------



## RainbowTown (Aug 10, 2021)

Fingers crossed that this creepy, arrogant cretin will get his just desserts. Even by Royal standards he's always come across as a first class fuckwit. Absolutely vile.


----------



## Serene (Aug 10, 2021)

I thought he was at Pizza express.


----------



## JimW (Aug 10, 2021)

Serene said:


> I thought he was at Pizza express.


Easy to mistakenly think you've spotted him there when they have dough balls on the menu.


----------



## Chilli.s (Aug 10, 2021)

Should have settled out of court when he had the chance


----------



## not-bono-ever (Aug 10, 2021)

It’s pretty unenforceable but this might not go to court - I can imagine that a settlement has already been proposed by the US lawyers but Andrew Mountbatten-nonce is likely so pig headed that he has refused to engage.


----------



## N_igma (Aug 10, 2021)




----------



## Tankus (Aug 10, 2021)

> The United States has in force a bilateral extradition treaty with each of the European Union (EU) Member States. These treaties account for over twenty percent of U.S. extradition treaties and a significantly higher percentage of U.S. extradition requests


Sweaty  better be  careful where  he  pays  golf  

they might  just  do  it  for  the  ex brexit  lols


----------



## bellaozzydog (Aug 10, 2021)

Andrew pierce asking “do we really want To see the duke of York in jail?”


----------



## Flavour (Aug 10, 2021)

Come on Ghislaine give us something to work with, let's make that plea deal a fair deal, we know that you know... now we want to know what you know.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Aug 10, 2021)

He’s a fucking  turnip


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 10, 2021)

bellaozzydog said:


> Andrew pierce asking “do we really want To see the duke of York in jail?”


only as a staging post to a more permanent solution


----------



## Raheem (Aug 10, 2021)

Andrew's real actual response to allegations he has been stonewalling: No comment.


----------



## neonwilderness (Aug 10, 2021)

N_igma said:


> View attachment 282967




When is his next Newsnight appearance?


----------



## BigMoaner (Aug 10, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Let's just remind ourselves of the intellectual giant that is the too-honourable nonce...



he honestly looks like my 5 year old looks when he's trying to hide somethign he's done wrong. it'd be hillarious if it wasn't so noncey.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 10, 2021)

bellaozzydog said:


> Andrew pierce asking “do we really want To see the duke of York in jail?”


Who is Andrew Pierce and how can I tell him yes?


----------



## Athos (Aug 10, 2021)

bellaozzydog said:


> Andrew pierce asking “do we really want To see the duke of York in jail?”


It would be a second choice, a long way behind hanging.


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 10, 2021)

bellaozzydog said:


> Andrew pierce asking “do we really want To see the duke of York in jail?”


Well I'm cool with that don't think its likely though


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 10, 2021)

bellaozzydog said:


> Andrew pierce asking “do we really want To see the duke of York in jail?”



As in are we going to go visit him? I'm not, personally.


----------



## LDC (Aug 10, 2021)

Channel 4 news leading with it. Apparently he's in a bit of a bind. He either goes to the US to defend himself in court, or a judgement is made without his defence. Oh how I laughed.


----------



## ricbake (Aug 10, 2021)

Channel 4 News did just apologies for accidently leading their piece on Governor Cuomo with a photo of Prince Andrew, by a mistake....


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 10, 2021)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Channel 4 news leading with it. Apparently he's in a bit of a bind. He either goes to the US to defend himself in court, or a judgement is made without his defence. Oh how I laughed.




Dashed sticky wicket for a fellow to find himself in.


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 10, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Dashed sticky wicket for a fellow to find himself in on.



Ftfy, old bean.

What what!


----------



## DaveCinzano (Aug 10, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Dashed sticky wicket for a fellow to find himself in.


----------



## Calamity1971 (Aug 10, 2021)

SpookyFrank said:


> As in are we going to go visit him? I'm not, personally.


Shame, that really would be punishment.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 10, 2021)

ricbake said:


> Channel 4 News did just apologies for accidently leading their piece on Governor Cuomo with a photo of Prince Andrew, by a mistake....


Neither story humorous...but that was genuinely funny.


----------



## TopCat (Aug 10, 2021)

Of course Prince Andrew isn’t sweating over this lawsuit – he can’t | Marina Hyde
					

The Duke of York is the subject of a US civil suit brought by Virginia Giuffre, who alleges she was abused while a minor, says Guardian columnist Marina Hyde




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## little_legs (Aug 10, 2021)

Did any of you, good folk, check on Sas today? I worry the old cunt might not survive the Nonce family’s troubles.


----------



## neonwilderness (Aug 10, 2021)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Channel 4 news leading with it. Apparently he's in a bit of a bind. He either goes to the US to defend himself in court, or a judgement is made without his defence. Oh how I laughed.


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Aug 11, 2021)

Reno said:


> View attachment 282939



Now, you are calling on me to remind you all how much I *LOVE* pictures of Brenda driving


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Aug 11, 2021)

EDIT: And I've just realised I've posted this in a serious thread and my attempts at humour can fuck off


----------



## Argonia (Aug 11, 2021)

Poor Andreas, he must feel like Eichmann on his way on the Trans-Siberian Railway to Jerusalem


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 11, 2021)

Raheem said:


> Andrew's real actual response to allegations he has been stonewalling: No comment.


Perhaps he might be immured like fortunato out of Poe's cask of amontillado


----------



## Wilf (Aug 11, 2021)

If there's a court case and if windsor is forced to engage with it in some shape or form, seems to me he's stuck with a specific line about Victoria Giuffre: 'I've never met her and the photo must have been faked' (pretty much his line in the Maitliss interview, with the last bit strongly implied).  A (civil) court case could get into all kinds of specifics, but if he has to retreat beyond that line to something like 'okay, I might have met her but didn't have sex', he's fucked.  Even that might not get a judgement against him, but that retreat would make him an 'official' liar.


----------



## Teaboy (Aug 11, 2021)

Of course he could just settle out of court with our money but that would likely mean guilt for most people no matter how desperately the establishment in this country try and spin it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 11, 2021)

Wilf said:


> If there's a court case and if windsor is forced to engage with it in some shape or form, seems to me he's stuck with a specific line about Victoria Giuffre: 'I've never met her and the photo must have been faked' (pretty much his line in the Maitliss interview, with the last bit strongly implied).  A (civil) court case could get into all kinds of specifics, but if he has to retreat beyond that line to something like 'okay, I might have met her but didn't have sex', he's fucked.  Even that might not get a judgement against him, but that retreat would make him an 'official' liar.


If only he didn't live in the age of johnson, blair and archer, andrew might have been one of the nation's greatest liars


----------



## gosub (Aug 11, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> If only he didn't live in the age of johnson, blair and archer, andrew might have been one of the nation's greatest liars


Nobody is ALL bad.  I heard he does a lot of stuff with kids but doesn't like to talk about it.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 11, 2021)

Teaboy said:


> Of course he could just settle out of court with our money but that would likely mean guilt for most people no matter how desperately the establishment in this country try and spin it.


The Ronaldo Gambit.


----------



## Teaboy (Aug 11, 2021)

Wilf said:


> The Ronaldo Gambit.



It didn't go so well for Jacko.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 11, 2021)

Teaboy said:


> It didn't go so well for Jacko.


Let’s put the Sweaty Nonce in touch with Jacko’s doctor!


----------



## Argonia (Aug 11, 2021)

danny la rouge said:


> Let’s put the Sweaty Nonce in touch with Jacko’s doctor!


Oh Danilo it's so so unfair to call a sweaty nonce a sweaty nonce. I'm sure good old innocent Andrew will haul you up in the Supreme Court and sue you for libel when he's found totally innocent like Innocent smoothies. You better be prepared to lose your fortune and your Balmoral Castle my friend!


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 11, 2021)

Argonia said:


> Oh Danilo it's so so unfair to call a sweaty nonce a sweaty nonce. I'm sure good old innocent Andrew will haul you up in the Supreme Court and sue you for libel when he's found totally innocent like Innocent smoothies. You better be prepared to lose your fortune and your Balmoral Castle my friend!


He’s welcome to try.


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Aug 11, 2021)

I'll be amazed if anything actually comes of this which is frankly, a fucking disgrace.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Aug 11, 2021)

danny la rouge said:


> He’s welcome to try.
> 
> View attachment 283167



Hmmm...


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 11, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> Hmmm...
> 
> View attachment 283168


Exactly. A few pics like that and the fact he used to revel in the name “Randy Andy” (euch), and I think La Rouge Mansions are safe for future generations.


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 11, 2021)

Mrs Miggins said:


> I'll be amazed if anything actually comes of this which is frankly, a fucking disgrace.


Yet more public embarassment certainly but I can't imagine any real consequences for him. I suspect there are probably a few meetings in London between Palace flunkies and the Foreign Office to try and get the Foreign Office to try and persuade the State Dept to make sure the whole thing gets quietly dropped.


----------



## Argonia (Aug 11, 2021)

All those memories of his 1000 women he has bedded will be swirling around his mind like the tempest with the three witches to Macbeth and he will be grasping to recall their names and addresses and what colour their moleskin diaries were and what sort of Salvador Dali lobster telephones they had in their apartments that he might just blunder and fluff his lines as Virginia approaches him on the warpath like the Lakota, Cheyenne, and Arapaho alighting on the unprepared 7th Cavalry Regime under Custer. It's going to be one hell of a gladiatorial display - which way will the Emperor's thumb point after Virginia snags him with her net and trident while he blunders around hopelessly with his little sword and shield dazzled by the raucous laughter of the crowd in the public gallery? Russell Crowe he ain't. Commodus will have a jamboree judging him and packing him off to prison.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Aug 11, 2021)

Argonia said:


> All those memories of his 1000 women he has bedded will be swirling around his mind like the tempest with the three witches to Macbeth and he will be grasping to recall their names and addresses and what colour their moleskin diaries were and what sort of Salvador Dali lobster telephones they had in their apartments that he might just blunder and fluff his lines as Virginia approaches him on the warpath like the Lakota, Cheyenne, and Arapaho alighting on the unprepared 7th Cavalry Regime under Custer. It's going to be one hell of a gladiatorial display - which way will the Emperor's thumb point after Virginia snags him with her net and trident while he blunders around hopelessly with his little sword and shield dazzled by the raucous laughter of the crowd in the public gallery?


I don't know what your question was but the answer is sweaty nonce.


----------



## Argonia (Aug 11, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> I don't know what your question was but the answer is sweaty nonce.


We're in complete agreement my friend. It's such heartening news that Saul Goodman has just been appointed as the judge in the courtroom in New York. Do try and focus on the case and try to ignore the heckling and laughter from the crowd as billions tune in live on TV eating popcorn and enjoying the fun and games. Nigel Farage and Neil Oliver and Michelle Dewberry are going to be breathless on GB News as they do the live commentary like John Motson for their seventeen viewers.

Don't slip up Goodman and give him liberty like serial paedophile 'King of Pop' Michael Jackson although of course any wise judge like you will stick to the doctrine of innocent before proven guilty and I'm sure you won't judge the sweaty nonce as a sweaty nonce before the trial is concluded while ignoring his utter dross to Emily Maitlis about not sweating and going to Woking Pizza Express while you listen to Sweaty Nonce on your iPod in the courtroom.


----------



## MrSki (Aug 12, 2021)




----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 12, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> Yet more public embarassment certainly but I can't imagine any real consequences for him. I suspect there are probably a few meetings in London between Palace flunkies and the Foreign Office to try and get the Foreign Office to try and persuade the State Dept to make sure the whole thing gets quietly dropped.


There must have been dozens of these meetings and none of them have done anything to squash the case. Prince Harry perfectly placed to rake in a vast sum as pundit on the trial of his 'uncle'


----------



## Argonia (Aug 12, 2021)

MrSki said:


>


When wise judge Saul Goodman finds dear Andreas totally innocent I look forward to him getting the keys to Broadmoor so he can begin a new life as a judicious governor of the facility.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 12, 2021)

Argonia said:


> When wise judge Saul Goodman finds dear Andreas totally innocent I look forward to him getting the keys to Broadmoor so he can begin a new life as a judicious governor of the facility.


Don't think I'd want the lunatick Andreas in charge at Broadmoor


----------



## Aladdin (Aug 12, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> Don't think I'd want the lunatick Andreas in charge at Broadmoor




I don't think I'd want the lunatic Andreas in charge of a brown paper bag..☹


----------



## Argonia (Aug 12, 2021)

Sugar Kane said:


> I don't think I'd want the lunatic Andreas in charge of a brown paper bag..☹


Oh ye of little faith Kane. He'd do a splendid job. He and Gary Glitter as deputy would be awesome.


----------



## Dogsauce (Aug 12, 2021)

Teaboy said:


> Of course he could just settle out of court with our money but that would likely mean guilt for most people no matter how desperately the establishment in this country try and spin it.



I think we’re already beyond the point where most people think he has some guilt, so nothing really to lose there.

Establishment strategy will be to kick it down the line until Brenda snuffs it, then let the blame for mishandling the situation and damaging the monarchy fall on Charles, so a lever to get him out of power, to replaced by the unopinionated and compliant hands  of his older non-woke son.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 12, 2021)

Dogsauce said:


> I think we’re already beyond the point where most people think he has some guilt, so nothing really to lose there.
> 
> Establishment strategy will be to kick it down the line until Brenda snuffs it, then let the blame for mishandling the situation and damaging the monarchy fall on Charles, so a lever to get him out of power, to replaced by the unopinionated and compliant hands  of his older non-woke son.


That would work fine if we didn't already know that Charles has been involved in decision-making on this already. Don't know if you've seen the times or mirror today Prince Charles ‘sees no way back to public life for Prince Andrew after Jeffrey Epstein scandal’


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 12, 2021)

Charles 'sees no way back to public life for Andrew after sex abuse lawsuit'
					

Prince Charles reportedly believes his brother will never return to public life following the serious allegations made against him by Virginia Giuffre, who has now filed a lawsuit in the US



					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Aug 12, 2021)

"Last crumb of his reputation" 
I think that ship sailed way back.
Around the time of that interview I'd say.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 12, 2021)




----------



## Raheem (Aug 12, 2021)

Argonia said:


> Oh ye of little faith Kane. He'd do a splendid job. He and Gary Glitter as deputy would be awesome.


Surely Glitter would be the leader?


----------



## brogdale (Aug 12, 2021)

Even the institutionally corrupt Met are beginning to worry how bent their cover for the sweaty nonce looks...


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 12, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Even the institutionally corrupt Met are beginning to worry how bent their cover for the sweaty nonce looks...
> 
> View attachment 283266
> View attachment 283267


Although, I’d like to correct Dame Dick, _she_ is above the law.  As far as murdering people on the London underground goes at least.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 12, 2021)

danny la rouge said:


> Although, I’d like to correct Dame Dick, _she_ is above the law.  As far as murdering people on the London underground goes at least.


Yep, them irony dials are pegged at 11.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 12, 2021)




----------



## MickiQ (Aug 12, 2021)

Does He Who Cannot Sweat get any public dosh? If he is no longer a 'working royal' (an oxymoron if ever there was) are we still forking out for him to just sit in his sweaty ass?


----------



## Saul Goodman (Aug 12, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> Does He Who Cannot Sweat get any public dosh? If he is no longer a 'working royal' (an oxymoron if ever there was) are we still forking out for him to just sit in his sweaty ass?


He's on JSA


----------



## belboid (Aug 12, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> He's on JSA


he quit royal duties 18 months ago, so his contributions have well run out. Probably had his UC suspended by now for not undertaking a reskilling (or, in Andrew's case, skilling) course.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 12, 2021)

belboid said:


> he quit royal duties 18 months ago, so his contributions have well run out. Probably had his UC suspended by now for not undertaking a reskilling (or, in Andrew's case) skilling) course.


I hope he’s keeping his online journal up to date with all the jobs he’s applying for.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 12, 2021)

Although maybe amend the CV and take out “enjoy spending time with children”.


----------



## belboid (Aug 12, 2021)

danny la rouge said:


> I hope he’s keeping his online journal up to date with all the jobs he’s applying for.


apparently he took umbrage at the suggestion he could do with improving his interview skills.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Aug 12, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> Charles 'sees no way back to public life for Andrew after sex abuse lawsuit'
> 
> 
> Prince Charles reportedly believes his brother will never return to public life following the serious allegations made against him by Virginia Giuffre, who has now filed a lawsuit in the US
> ...



Reportedly.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Aug 12, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> Reportedly.


🤣
How well remunerated is the position of Royal PR?


----------



## Sasaferrato (Aug 12, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> 🤣
> How well remunerated is the position of Royal PR?



Haven't a clue.

My comment was re the Mirror, not the Prince of Questionable Morality.

It irritates me greatly when papers qualify their utter bollocks with 'it is reported' 'allegedly' 'is said to have said' etc.

I think the odds on Charles saying anything publicly on this are zero. I should imagine that if Andrew were to suffer a sudden and fatal heart attack, he would be quite relieved.

Has there been a criminal offence? If so, let the US prosecutors extradite him and try him. (I doubt if he would go willingly).

The situation as it is is completely unsatisfactory.

Oh, and whatever the outcome, his behaviour has been such that he should not ever return to 'public life'.


----------



## maomao (Aug 12, 2021)

I think he should be forced back into public life. The whole point of the monarchy is that they're in that position because they were born to it. There shouldn't be a get out or they should just be done with the whole institution


----------



## teqniq (Aug 12, 2021)

danny la rouge said:


> Although, I’d like to correct Dame Dick, _she_ is above the law.  As far as murdering people on the London underground goes at least.


So also are various government and ex-government ministers it would appear.


----------



## dylanredefined (Aug 12, 2021)

maomao said:


> I think he should be forced back into public life. The whole point of the monarchy is that they're in that position because they were born to it. There shouldn't be a get out or they should just be done with the whole institution


  The whole point of monarchy is anyone who isn't leading a mob to storm their palace doesn't get a say in what they do.
  The only reason to keep them is the whole faff that would follow getting rid of them.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 12, 2021)

dylanredefined said:


> The whole point of monarchy is anyone who isn't leading a mob to storm their palace doesn't get a say in what they do.
> The only reason to keep them is the whole faff that would follow getting rid of them.




Faff? Bit of sawdust to mop up the red stuff and a pit for the remains doesn't sound too arduous tbf.


----------



## Raheem (Aug 12, 2021)

It's the sorting out the castles and putting the paintings on eBay that's a pain.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Aug 12, 2021)

To be utterly honest, I wouldn’t want to have to go to the USA to face any kind of judicial stuff. Although both noxious individuals, both Mountbatten-Nonce and Assange know this


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 12, 2021)

Raheem said:


> It's the sorting out the castles and putting the paintings on eBay that's a pain.




I'll take Windsor, if that's OK. It's handy for the Waterloo train.


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 12, 2021)

I suspect he'll get the Duke of Windsor treatment sooner or later and get shunted off somewhere out of the way. Less glamourous than the Bahamas of course.

Swiftly followed by reports of his death, although really he will have been shipped to South Georgia for inpenguination.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 13, 2021)

His opportunities for chiseling and grasping will be much reduced as well.  Even the scummiest businessman won't want to use his services at the moment. Cunt's like him always have assets stashed away, but I gather he's pretty much reliant on bank of mum and dad at the moment.  It will be interesting to know whether she's paying his mounting legal bills.


----------



## Raheem (Aug 13, 2021)

Wilf said:


> UpHis opportunities for chiseling and grasping will be much reduced as well.  Even the scummiest businessman won't want to use his services at the moment. Cunt's like him always have assets stashed away, but I gather he's pretty much reliant on bank of mum and dad at the moment.  It will be interesting to know whether she's paying his *mounting legal bills*.


One way of putting it.


----------



## dylanredefined (Aug 13, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Faff? Bit of sawdust to mop up the red stuff and a pit for the remains doesn't sound too arduous tbf.


 That's the easy bit. How do you stop a President Blair or Cameroon oozing into the top job? Let alone all the signs and insignia . In fact got a load of oath of allegiances printed out on nice paper. Can the revolution hold off till they are used up?


----------



## maomao (Aug 13, 2021)

dylanredefined said:


> How do you stop a President Blair or Cameroon oozing into the top job?


By shooting them.


----------



## seeformiles (Aug 13, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> Does He Who Cannot Sweat get any public dosh? If he is no longer a 'working royal' (an oxymoron if ever there was) are we still forking out for him to just sit in his sweaty ass?



He’s costing us much less at the moment given he can’t really leave the UK to play golf with despots and sex offenders on our dime.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 13, 2021)

seeformiles said:


> He’s costing us much less at the moment given he can’t really leave the UK to play golf with despots and sex offenders on our dime.


Apart from being a sex offender - that's quite a way to start a sentence, I realise - he really is an all round scumbag, a scumbag for all seasons.  Him and sarah ferguson were one of the most appalling grasping couple's, all entitlement and thievery, from the public purse or on the back of royal connections. Then there's his palling up to a range of murderous regimes, as you say. I seem to recall a bit of arms dealing as well.  He benefits from the very worst of Britain, the old money and obsequious shite of royalty, allied with greasing the wheels of neo-liberalism.


----------



## quiet guy (Aug 13, 2021)




----------



## brogdale (Aug 13, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> I suspect he'll get the Duke of Windsor treatment sooner or later and get shunted off somewhere out of the way. Less glamourous than the Bahamas of course.
> 
> Swiftly followed by reports of his death, although really he will have been shipped to South Georgia for inpenguination.


Liked mostly for the realisation that U75 has now adopted and normalised Pickman's model fabulous word _*inpenguination *_to describe the fate of the former people.


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 13, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Liked mostly for the realisation that U75 has now adopted and normalised Pickman's model fabulous word _*inpenguination *_to describe the fate of the former people.


IT'S MY WORD BUT HIS CONCEPT.


----------



## Fairweather (Aug 13, 2021)




----------



## Argonia (Aug 13, 2021)

I just spied dear old sweaters noncimus on the campaign ground roaming scattered and confused drinking tramp super on a park bench in Nuneaton through my field glasses and my Edward Snowden satellite sonar Stasi surveillance systems and he was absolutely rapt to attention reading Ben Johnson's "Sejanus His Fall" to prepare his dazzling brilliant defence case shown pictures of him perspiring like Serena Williams after a brutal victory against Garbine Muguruza and the evidence to prove conclusively that he has never stepped foot in Pizza Express in Woking in his little lifetime because he was too busy romping around Tokyo like Godzilla having sex with 1000 women. I hope he didn't try it on with poor old Emily Maitlis after the poor woman had to sit in the same room as sweatington bear and endure the utter fucking dross gushing out of his fucking dreadful cakehole like oil surging out of the ground in Pennsylvania in the late 19th century.

It is all rather entertaining though one must keep sober and think of the poor women involved.


----------



## eatmorecheese (Aug 13, 2021)

Argonia said:


> I just spied dear old sweaters noncimus on the campaign ground through my field glasses and my Edward Snowden satellite sonar Stasi surveillance systems and he was absolutely rapt to attention reading Ben Johnson's "Sejanus His Fall" to prepare his dazzling brilliant defence case shown pictures of him perspiring like Serena Williams after a brutal victory against Garbine Muguruza and the evidence to prove conclusively that he has never stepped foot in Pizza Express in Woking in his little lifetime because he was too busy romping around Tokyo like Godzilla having sex with 1000 women


Nope. Read this twice, still none the wiser


----------



## Argonia (Aug 13, 2021)

eatmorecheese said:


> Nope. Read this twice, still none the wiser


Do keep up old chap. Get to Specsavers fast and pop your new lorgnettes on in your Royal Opera House window seat, read it again, and have another go. I'm sure genius Prince Andrew would grasp it in a nano-second with his Harold Wilson first at Jesus college Oxford.

I'm just saying that sweaters is in hotter water than a poor outclassed besieging army attempting to scale a castle they have not studied in depth while the defenders pour boiling oil all over them, slam down the fucking portcullis hard, and ensure the keep is safe and secure.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 13, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> IT'S MY WORD BUT HIS CONCEPT.


CAPS LOCK angry!  

My humble apologies.


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 13, 2021)

brogdale said:


> CAPS LOCK angry!
> 
> My humble apologies.


I had a bout of RAGE.

You're forgiven.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 13, 2021)

I look forward to the point where the OED feels compelled in include your fabulous word _inpenguination _in it's 'new words of the year' list based on its popular usage.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 13, 2021)

brogdale said:


> I look forward to the point where the OED feels compelled in include your fabulous word _inpenguination _in it's 'new words of the year' list based on its popular usage.


Based on the number of former people inpenguinated


----------



## InfoBurner (Aug 14, 2021)




----------



## Argonia (Aug 14, 2021)

Prince Andrew just had another James Joycean epiphany in his careful reading of "Finnegan's Wake" and his defence case has just ramped up a gear with his new claim that the universe is really an illusion and is the veil of maya and that the 1000 women he had sex with were all computer simulations in the Truman Show.

Boy is he going to be on fire when legal genius Mike Mansfield lurches into him in a very loud falsetto that melts poor Andrew's quark sized brain with sharp attacks in the courtroom like the Allied forces crashing into Mussolini's collapsing Republic of Salo 

It's going to be a great watch on GB News with a roaringly drunk Nigel Farage doing the voiceover in his fluent Mandarin.

Andrew is going to be sweating so hard a new River Danube will open up in the courtroom and we will all die of climate change floods.


----------



## Argonia (Aug 14, 2021)

Developments in North Korean Britain are moving fast.

Prince Andrew just got an honorary degree from the University of Dundee for his services to the 1000 women he has had sex with and an A* grade at A-level like the 1 in 6 students who cannot read or write the letter a let alone the full English alphabet but who all got given A*s at A-level anyway because we are the most successful education system in the world and rightly are absolutely rock bottom of the Pearson Index one step behind much more successful North Korea. Our education system is so successful we have just gone into inverse territory at the Pearson index and disappeared into a Hiernonymous Bosch depiction of hell.

Any day now we will win the Euros against a far superior Italian team and lurch up to the top of the Pearson index like Usain Bolt on a massive amphetamine sulphate bender when our brilliant students finally grasp that 2+3 is 5 and win an Olympic gold in snakes and ladders. We are such a brilliant and talented country us North Koreans with our superb Kim Jong Un Thought promulgated by wise leaders Boris and Thatcherite Starmer both of whom grasp that inflation is running at 753% and unemployment is at 4 billion.

 Incredible genius Rishi Sunak is on the case at the brilliant Bank of England where chimpanzees play with abacuses made of swiss cheese to work out inflation rates and is sorting out inflation fast by sleeping all day in a hammock engorged with mangoes and filled up with rum and coke and failing to open any of his red boxes at all just as brilliant genius and climate change denier Nigel Lawson didn't manage to do a stroke of work in the fabulously successful 1980s because he was so busy with Jeffrey Archer at Cynthia Payne's brothel getting flogged like a Tudor vagrant by Chief Whip of the wonderfully talented Conservative Party Frank Bough.

Meanwhile Richard Branson doesn't realise that the socialists are annexing the country fast at the ballot box and Dennis Healey will soon ramp up super rich tax rates to 95% to fund the NHS and Branson will be left in a homeless hostel in Barbados with a bag of peanuts to his name and a vague intuition that his memory of his little Yuri Gagarin dash into the cosmos might have been an illusion after all just as Tony Blair in his prison cell in the Hague's Prisoner Cell Block H complex will soon forget the name of Cherie and won't recall at all what colour her silk bloomers were in the good old days in his Stalin dacha on the Black Sea Coast with his daily arguments with incredibly brilliant Iron Chancellor Gordon Brown who really got to grips with the 215% inflation rate in his superb time in charge.


----------



## krtek a houby (Aug 14, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> I suspect he'll get the Duke of Windsor treatment sooner or later and get shunted off somewhere out of the way. Less glamourous than the Bahamas of course.
> 
> Swiftly followed by reports of his death, although really he will have been shipped to South Georgia for inpenguination.



Give him a ship in Sligo. There's precedent for retiring dubious Mountbattens in that part of the world.


----------



## Argonia (Aug 14, 2021)

Brilliant John Nash genius Andrew who has just soiled his lovely cashmere Union Jack boxer shorts is preparing for his little trip on the HMS Titanic steered by Captain Haddock Farage to New York by revisiting his teenage listening to Minor Threat in Buck House.

He listened to their commandments to not drink and to not sleep around with complete dilligence so he could keep a completely lucid mind.

The billions watching on TV around the world will be roaring support for the man who has single-handedly solved the climate emergency by having sex with 1000 women. Greta Thunberg will go on the Titanic and will be in the public gallery urging support for every brilliant claim in his truly and utterly dazzling defence case including his new claim that the earth is flat and that proves he is innocent and his lawyer David Icke's claim that Covid is a hoax by Bill Gates and that proves that Lee Harvey Oswald was innocent.

He is going to absolutely walk this case. It's like Mandela's long walk to freedom. He is going to love the smell of the fresh air outside Wormwood Scrubs when he is at liberty to eat ice creams and have sex with another 100,000,000 women in order to bring carbon dioxide down from its 4.6 million year apex. I am sure that once he is a totally free man Andrew the genius will form a wrestling tag team at Cop-26 at the front of the atrium with utter genius Donald Trump who will fix the climate crisis with his brilliant analysis that climate change is a hoax made up by the Chinese backed up by brilliant genius James Delingpole who will point out superbly that the planet isn't on fire at all even though it is now 147,027,126 degrees celsius in Siciliy.

North Korean Britain is so completely and entirely impressive.All 65 million people, 1 in 6 of whom can't read the alphabet, are all complete geniuses. It's a complete utopia.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Aug 14, 2021)

Argonia said:


> Brilliant John Nash genius Andrew who has just soiled his lovely cashmere Union Jack boxer shorts is preparing for his little trip on the HMS Titanic steered by Captain Haddock Farage to New York by revisiting his teenage listening to Minor Threat in Buck House.
> 
> He listened to their commandments to not drink and to not sleep around with complete dilligence so he could keep a completely lucid mind.
> 
> ...




Give it a rest FFS!


----------



## Argonia (Aug 14, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> Give it a rest FFS!


OK Sas I'm off to the beach now


----------



## krtek a houby (Aug 14, 2021)

Argonia said:


> North Korean Britain is so completely and entirely impressive.All 65 million people, 1 in 6 of whom can't read the alphabet, are all complete geniuses. It's a complete utopia.



Careful, there.

You probably don't mean it, but it comes across as sneering.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Aug 14, 2021)

Argonia said:


> OK Sas I'm off to the beach now



Thank the Lord!


----------



## krtek a houby (Aug 14, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> Thank the Lord!



Let's leave religion out of it.


----------



## Argonia (Aug 14, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> Give it a rest FFS!


I'll leave Andrew to the judges to determine whether he is guilty or innocent and there will not be a single word further from me on this thread.

My only concern now I have just joined the police force is to find Tony Blair and arrest him for his trial in the Hague.

I am on the case.

Over and out.

From a police constable on the beat aiming for Chief Constable of Northumbria Police after the cuffs are applied by my efficious colleague Miss Marple

In the CCTV control room right now

If we finally nab him after all these long years I'll be perfectly civil to him because guilt has to be proved in a court of law and will personally brew him up a nice cup of tea and let him read his rights in the secure cell


----------



## gosub (Aug 14, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Faff? Bit of sawdust to mop up the red stuff and a pit for the remains doesn't sound too arduous tbf.


So then you have a republic.

What sort of republic? One like France or America or Eire or Russia?


----------



## bellaozzydog (Aug 14, 2021)

Argonia said:


> I just spied dear old sweaters noncimus on the campaign ground roaming scattered and confused drinking tramp super on a park bench in Nuneaton through my field glasses and my Edward Snowden satellite sonar Stasi surveillance systems and he was absolutely rapt to attention reading Ben Johnson's "Sejanus His Fall" to prepare his dazzling brilliant defence case shown pictures of him perspiring like Serena Williams after a brutal victory against Garbine Muguruza and the evidence to prove conclusively that he has never stepped foot in Pizza Express in Woking in his little lifetime because he was too busy romping around Tokyo like Godzilla having sex with 1000 women. I hope he didn't try it on with poor old Emily Maitlis after the poor woman had to sit in the same room as sweatington bear and endure the utter fucking dross gushing out of his fucking dreadful cakehole like oil surging out of the ground in Pennsylvania in the late 19th century.
> 
> It is all rather entertaining though one must keep sober and think of the poor women involved.


Lorem Ipsum?


----------



## moochedit (Aug 14, 2021)

gosub said:


> So then you have a republic.
> 
> What sort of republic? One like France or America or Eire or Russia?


Or north korea?


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 15, 2021)

brogdale said:


> I look forward to the point where the OED feels compelled in include your fabulous word _inpenguination _in it's 'new words of the year' list based on its popular usage.


As do I. I think a few more years of using and we could be in with a chance.


----------



## danski (Aug 16, 2021)

image removed


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 16, 2021)

danski said:


> Was only a matter of time


I don't think that's appropriate


----------



## danski (Aug 16, 2021)

Fair enough, I'll remove if you insist but I don't think it's really any different to the other stuff posted in this thread. ie. intended to make the slimey fucker look more slimey.


----------



## Orang Utan (Aug 16, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> I don't think that's appropriate.


it’s spot on for that meme. the only inappropriate thing about it is Prince Andrew’s conduct


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 16, 2021)

danski said:


> Fair enough, I'll remove if you insist but I don't think it's really any different to the other stuff posted in this thread. ie. intended to make the slimey fucker look more slimey.


It's the image of his victim I object to being used as the butt of a sick joke. Thank you for removing it.


----------



## danski (Aug 16, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> It's the image of his victim I object to being used as the butt of a sick joke. Thank you for removing it.


Removed.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Aug 19, 2021)

I wonder if there's a painting of him in The Tower of London, sweating profusely.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 20, 2021)

Guardian are on this...


----------



## Saul Goodman (Aug 20, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Guardian are on this...
> 
> View attachment 284471


Damaged reputation...  🤣


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 20, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Guardian are on this...
> 
> View attachment 284471


Spoiler alert...


----------



## Clair De Lune (Aug 20, 2021)

eatmorecheese said:


> Nope. Read this twice, still none the wiser


Nonce the wiser, surely?


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 20, 2021)

Clair De Lune said:


> Nonce the wiser, surely?


I see what you did there.


----------



## Clair De Lune (Aug 20, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> I see what you did there.


It just seemed like a missed opportunity you know?


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 20, 2021)

Clair De Lune said:


> It just seemed like a missed opportunity you know?


Absolutely. Get in there!


----------



## eatmorecheese (Aug 20, 2021)

Clair De Lune said:


> Nonce the wiser, surely?


Boom


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 20, 2021)

Prince Andrew offered £75m to take public lie detector test over Jeffrey Epstein
					

Investigative journalist Ian Halperin has offered Prince Andrew $100 million (£75m) to take a polygraph test over his relationship with the late paedophile Jeffrey Epstein




					www.mirror.co.uk
				




Prince Andrew is being offered $100 million (£75m) to take a public lie detector test about his relationship with the late paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.

Investigative journalist Ian Halperin is offering the Duke of the York the money, equal to £73.3 million, “to come clean and take a polygraph test with a world-leading polygraph examiner.”

“If he (Andrew) is as innocent as he says he is, he passes and it clears his name. It is a great way for him to vindicate himself in 45 minutes,” Halperin told Mail Online.


“It will be a pay per view event, hopefully the biggest pay per view in history, where Andrew gets $100million for just turning up and taking the test.”

The writer added: “So it is a win-win for him and he would be able to make a donation to victims of child sex trafficking.

"It would make him look great.

“Nobody has ever made that amount of money for 45 minutes work. And we will provide him with hair and make-up.”


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Aug 20, 2021)

Amongst the various problems with that is the fact polygraph tests are utter bullshit.


----------



## Clair De Lune (Aug 20, 2021)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Amongst the various problems with that is the fact polygraph tests are utter bullshit.


"The polygraph, invented in the early 1920s, detects physiological responses to lying (such as elevated heart and respiratory rates as well as spikes in blood pressure. "

For a non respirating, lizard nonce it's quite easy to pass a polygraph I suspect.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 20, 2021)

Clair De Lune said:


> "The polygraph, invented in the early 1920s, detects physiological responses to lying (such as elevated heart and respiratory rates as well as spikes in blood pressure. "
> 
> For a non respirating, lizard nonce it's quite easy to pass a polygraph I suspect.



I think they also pick up on your sweat glands, could be interesting.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Aug 20, 2021)

Clair De Lune said:


> For a non respirating, lizard nonce it's quite easy to pass a polygraph I suspect.


I think you have just won me with this comment (and just to ruin it, I am a little bit drunk, although will review in the morning and edit as needed  )


----------



## Clair De Lune (Aug 20, 2021)

ruffneck23 said:


> I think you have just won me with this comment (and just to ruin it, I am a little bit drunk, although will review in the morning and edit as needed  )


Wait...are you the prize? 
Are you good at pouring drinks?


----------



## ruffneck23 (Aug 20, 2021)

Clair De Lune said:


> Wait...are you the prize?
> Are you good at pouring drinks?


I'm the star prize ⭐

True story: Watching 'Cocktail' at the Odeon in Brighton, changed my life and I became a cocktail barman, worked at TGI Fridays and was trained (for 1 day, lol) by a guy called Stewart who allegedly trained Tom Cruise

So yes, I can pour drinks...


----------



## kabbes (Aug 20, 2021)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Amongst the various problems with that is the fact polygraph tests are utter bullshit.


They can work quite well if the person taking them believes strongly enough that they work quite well.  Besides, the court of public opinion doesn’t care anyway — refusal to take it is automatically damning.


----------



## Clair De Lune (Aug 20, 2021)

ruffneck23 said:


> I'm the star prize ⭐
> 
> True story: Watching 'Cocktail' at the Odeon in Brighton, changed my life and I became a cocktail barman, worked at TGI Fridays and was trained (for 1 day, lol) by a guy called Stewart who allegedly trained Tom Cruise)
> 
> So yes, I can pour drinks...


I've not won anything in years. This is great news


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 20, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Prince Andrew offered £75m to take public lie detector test over Jeffrey Epstein
> 
> 
> Investigative journalist Ian Halperin has offered Prince Andrew $100 million (£75m) to take a polygraph test over his relationship with the late paedophile Jeffrey Epstein
> ...


This is a publicity stunt, I assume this guy doesn't actually have $100m to spare and is relying on He Who Cannot Sweat either refusing or more likely not even bothering to respond so he can point to that and say 'Look He Must Be Hiding Something'
Whilst with the possible exception of his Mum (certainly not his older bro) there is probably no-one who on Earth who really believes HWCS's version of events, refusal to pay attention to this joker does not alas prove anything.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Aug 20, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> This is a publicity stunt, I assume this guy doesn't actually have $100m to spare and is relying on He Who Cannot Sweat either refusing or more likely not even bothering to respond so he can point to that and say 'Look He Must Be Hiding Something'
> Whilst with the possible exception of his Mum (certainly not his older bro) there is probably no-one who on Earth who really believes HWCS's version of events, refusal to pay attention to this joker does not alas prove anything.


Of course it was a joke but I reckon he'd be able to finance it with crowd funding, tickets, a phone-in and television rights. Who wouldn't pay a tenner to watch the sweaty nonce do another interview.


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 20, 2021)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Amongst the various problems with that is the fact polygraph tests are utter bullshit.


Fairly easy to dupe the machine -a nice dose of anti anxiety meds or a couple of valium should do it. There's a reason they're not accepted as evidence in pretty much most courts of law, even some us states won't allow them. They can be used by police for investigative purposes but not evidentiary.


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 20, 2021)

I think I should probably cut back on watching crime shows...


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 20, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> This is a publicity stunt, I assume this guy doesn't actually have $100m to spare and is relying on He Who Cannot Sweat either refusing or more likely not even bothering to respond so he can point to that and say 'Look He Must Be Hiding Something'
> Whilst with the possible exception of his Mum (certainly not his older bro) there is probably no-one who on Earth who really believes HWCS's version of events, refusal to pay attention to this joker does not alas prove anything.



Oh course it is not serious, but is very well written and adds to the pressure on him and his despicable family.

“you were offered the chance to clear your name and raise $100m for sex trafficked kids, why did you not do that?”


----------



## Saul Goodman (Aug 20, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Oh course it is not serious, but is very well written and adds to the pressure on him and his despicable family.
> 
> “you were offered the chance to clear your name and raise $100m for sex trafficked kids, why did you not do that?”


A lose lose situation.... WIN!


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Aug 20, 2021)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Amongst the various problems with that is the fact polygraph tests are utter bullshit.


In different circumstances though, I reckon he'd leap at the money.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Aug 20, 2021)

I'm not a prince. But if someone offered me a hundred million quid to take a lie detector test for something I hadn't done I reckon I'd do it.
Early retirement.


----------



## Raheem (Aug 20, 2021)

Think he's on for an early retirement either way.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Aug 20, 2021)

Raheem said:


> retirement


🤣


----------



## Wilf (Aug 20, 2021)

Raheem said:


> Think he's on for an early retirement either way.


He's 61, so he'll be getting his full state pension in 2026?  Obviously need a few quid to tide him over till then.


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Aug 21, 2021)

Wilf said:


> He's 61, so he'll be getting his full state pension in 2026?  Obviously need a few quid to tide him over till then.









"Freddo bars, still only 15p"


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Aug 21, 2021)

Of course I'd probably lie if I had done it and my retirement would be good anyway.


----------



## Johnny Doe (Aug 21, 2021)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Amongst the various problems with that is the fact polygraph tests are utter bullshit.


But...Jeremy Kyle?🤔


----------



## A380 (Aug 21, 2021)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Amongst the various problems with that is the fact polygraph tests are utter bullshit.



The machines are complete nonsense. Good operators can get good results though. A good operator is a very skilled and experienced interviewer well versed in picking up tells and other behaviours in the subject. The machine just adds to the pressure.


----------



## Buddy Bradley (Aug 21, 2021)

A380 said:


> The machines are complete nonsense. Good operators can get good results though. A good operator is a very skilled and experienced interviewer well versed in picking up tells and other behaviours in the subject. The machine just adds to the pressure.


----------



## krtek a houby (Aug 21, 2021)

See also


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 9, 2021)

Prince Andrew heads to Scotland ahead of Virginia Giuffre 'sex assault' hearing
					

The Duke of York has driven 500 miles to be with the Queen at her estate in Balmoral ahead of a telephone hearing over claims he sexually assaulted Ms Giuffre when she was a teenager



					www.edinburghlive.co.uk
				




Seems that the US lawyers must serve the papers on HWCS in person within 120 days and as a result he has been
bravely hiding in his house, afraid to set foot outside. Now he has made a dash for Scotland in his car and will try to gallantly hole up on his mum’s estate with the hope he can sit it out until 8th December when the 120 days is up and then triumphantly return to the limelight and the public adoration that he feels he deserves.


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 9, 2021)

This doesn't make any practical difference to the outcome, I'm sure the case can proceed even if they don't serve the papers and he is safe from any consequences so long as he stays out of the USA.
The man is the unchallenged master of appearing guilty without coming out and saying it. I think public adoration and the limelight have gone possibly forever now. He's probably going to spend the rest of his life living off his Mum.
I wonder if Chucky will turf him out of the family firm when he gets the top job and sits on the Golden Seat. 
I didn't realise that Balmoral was so big though, 50,000 acres is over half the size of the Isle of Wight


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 9, 2021)

He needs to decamp to a sympathetic embassy for the duration


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 9, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> This doesn't make any practical difference to the outcome, I'm sure the case can proceed even if they don't serve the papers and he is safe from any consequences so long as he stays out of the USA.
> The man is the unchallenged master of appearing guilty without coming out and saying it. I think public adoration and the limelight have gone possibly forever now. He's probably going to spend the rest of his life living off his Mum.
> I wonder if Chucky will turf him out of the family firm when he gets the top job and sits on the Golden Seat.
> I didn't realise that Balmoral was so big though, 50,000 acres is over half the size of the Isle











						Rogue Male (novel) - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 9, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> I didn't realise that Balmoral was so big though, 50,000 acres is over half the size of the Isle of Wight





She must have worked really hard to buy a place that big!


----------



## two sheds (Sep 9, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> She must have worked really hard to buy a place that big!


And to pay the inheritance tax it must have cost her


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 9, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> She must have worked really hard to buy a place that big!


We visited her great-gran's holiday cottage on the Isle of Wight a couple of weeks ago, it's pretty amazing but run by English Heritage nowadays, One of the intriguing possibilities of Scottish Independence is that if they then become a republic, places like Balmoral will fall under Scottish Heritage and become a tourist attraction.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 9, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> One of the intriguing possibilities of Scottish Independence is that if they then become a republic, places like Balmoral will fall under Scottish Heritage and become a tourist attraction.




Will it? It's a private residence, privately owned and that.


----------



## two sheds (Sep 9, 2021)

Or Property of the Crown which would make it a bit more murky?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 9, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> We visited her great-gran's holiday cottatge on the Isle of Wight a couple of weeks ago, it's pretty amazing but run by English Heritage nowadays, One of the intriguing possibilities of Scottish Independence is that if they then become a republic, places like Balmoral will fall under Scottish Heritage and become a tourist attraction.


It's not that intriguing


----------



## andysays (Sep 9, 2021)

two sheds said:


> Or Property of the Crown which would make it a bit more murky?


Some are private and some are property of the crown. I don't know which category Balmoral specifically is in.

But the simple fact of Scottish independence wouldn't really change the status of Crown properties in Scotland, and the Queen would still be Queen of Scotland, unless the new Scottish government decided to do something to change that.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 9, 2021)

andysays said:


> Some are private and some are property of the crown. I don't know which category Balmoral specifically is in.
> 
> But the simple fact of Scottish independence wouldn't really change the status of Crown properties in Scotland, and the Queen would still be Queen of Scotland, unless the new Scottish government decided to do something to change that.


Indeed.  People sometimes get confused about this.  The union of Crowns in 1603 just meant Scotland and England had kings who were the same person.  James VI of Scotland happened to be the same guy who was James I of England.   If the 1707 Union of Parliaments is dissolved, then Scotland will have an Elizabeth I and England will continue to have an Elizabeth II.  Until she dies, at which point hopefully everyone will realise how utterly fed up they are with the sweaty nonse harbouring parasites and decide to do without a monarchy.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 9, 2021)

danny la rouge said:


> Indeed.  People sometimes get confused about this.  The union of Crowns in 1603 just meant Scotland and England had kings who were the same person.  James VI of Scotland happened to be the same guy who was James I of England.   If the 1707 Union of Parliaments is dissolved, then Scotland will have an Elizabeth I and England will continue to have an Elizabeth II.  Until she dies, at which point hopefully everyone will realise how utterly fed up they are with the sweaty nonse harbouring parasites and decide to do without a monarchy.


Can't we just chop her in twain then both countries could have a Liz 1.5


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 9, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> Can't we just chop her in twain then both countries could have a Liz 1.5


OK Solomon.


----------



## gosub (Sep 9, 2021)

I'm still pissed off the Queensferry bridge isn't called the Queen Elizabeth the First and Second, Third Forth Bridge


----------



## krtek a houby (Sep 9, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> One of the intriguing possibilities of Scottish Independence is that if they then become a republic, places like Balmoral will fall under Scottish Heritage and become a tourist attraction.


When. Not "if".


----------



## Aladdin (Sep 9, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> It's not that intriguing


Yep. I thought it was a bit tatty and smelly in places.


----------



## andysays (Sep 9, 2021)

krtek a houby said:


> When. Not "if".


Not really for you (or me, TBH) to say though.

It would/will be up to those living in Scotland to decide.


----------



## quimcunx (Sep 9, 2021)

gosub said:


> I'm still pissed off the Queensferry bridge isn't called the Queen Elizabeth the First and Second, Third Forth Bridge



Or the Queen Elizabeth the First or Second Third or Fifth Firth of Forth bridge.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 9, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> This doesn't make any practical difference to the outcome, I'm sure the case can proceed even if they don't serve the papers and he is safe from any consequences so long as he stays out of the USA.
> The man is the unchallenged master of appearing guilty without coming out and saying it. I think public adoration and the limelight have gone possibly forever now. He's probably going to spend the rest of his life living off his Mum.
> I wonder if Chucky will turf him out of the family firm when he gets the top job and sits on the Golden Seat.
> I didn't realise that Balmoral was so big though, 50,000 acres is over half the size of the Isle of Wight


I'd have thought the best strategy would be for the lawyers to make all the 'normal' attempts at contacting him and then, 'in the interests of justice',  to turn up at the gates of balmoral or whichever hidey hole his is using. With the press in attendance, naturally.  The queen might say fuck it, she's nearly dead and will protect him till the end of her days, but the monarchy as an institution wouldn't want that kind of theatre.  Next step would be for an opposition MP to ask johnsons something along the lines of 'modern Britain... nobody above the law... importance of dealing with sexual violence... would you agree that the duke of york should cooperate...'.  Not sure any of that puts him much nearer a courtroom, but it would isolate him even further within the royal family and shine a light on the queen defending the dirty fucking nonce.  As to the bigger issue of epstein/windsor's victims getting justice, you can only speculate.  I wouldn't rule out windsor making a financial offer as his last line of defence, but have a feeling he'll ultimately die a free man.


----------



## krtek a houby (Sep 9, 2021)

andysays said:


> Not really for you (or me, TBH) to say though.
> 
> It would/will be up to those living in Scotland to decide.



That's what the occupiers always say.


----------



## andysays (Sep 9, 2021)

krtek a houby said:


> That's what the occupiers always say.


Who are you calling an occupier?

In the first place, the idea that Scotland is currently "occupied" by England or anyone else is a bit ridiculous.

And in case you're suggesting that I personally am in some way responsible for this "occupation", I'll also point out that my family is from Scotland, as I'm sure I've mentioned a few times on Urban.

But as I'm not currently resident in Scotland, I recognise that it's not for me to determine either the question of independence or that of whether a hypothetical independent Scotland changes from a monarchy to a republic (I have my opinions, which I'm sure aren't difficult to guess from my previous posts on the subject, but that's something different).

So for you, an Irish citizen currently resident in Japan and with zero connection to Scotland as far as I'm aware, to jump in and insist that it's when, not if, seems a bit presumptuous to me, and your subsequent response suggests you really don't know what you're on about.

Anyway, derail over. Back to the sweaty nonce...


----------



## gosub (Sep 9, 2021)

krtek a houby said:


> That's what the occupiers always say.


I know Scotland was heavily involved with the British Empire but don't think they unilateral decision making powers over all of it.


----------



## krtek a houby (Sep 9, 2021)

andysays said:


> Who are you calling an occupier?
> 
> In the first place, the idea that Scotland is currently "occupied" by England or anyone else is a bit ridiculous.
> 
> ...



You got your exit from the EU. 

Despite not all residents of the UK voting for it.

Only fair that Scotland and the 6 counties get their freedom.

Not sure what a Republican's geographic location has to do with the cause, though.


----------



## andysays (Sep 9, 2021)

krtek a houby said:


> You got your exit from the EU.
> 
> Despite not all residents of the UK voting for it.
> 
> ...


Are you suggesting that my support for Brexit makes me an "occupier"?

Or are you just posting nonsense for the sake of it now?


----------



## krtek a houby (Sep 9, 2021)

andysays said:


> Are you suggesting that my support for Brexit makes me an "occupier"?
> 
> Or are you just posting nonsense for the sake of it now?



Nah, you just don't get to dictate to others wanting an exit from the hideous UK.

Their current whereabouts are unimportant, tbf.

What matters is that those who oppose the nations who wish for independence have always been told that it's not up to them/their economy will suffer/ they will regret it etc etc.

It's the language of the occupiers. No offense to you, as don't know your history and connections... far as aware...


----------



## andysays (Sep 9, 2021)

krtek a houby said:


> Nah, you just don't get to dictate to others wanting an exit from the hideous UK.
> 
> Their current whereabouts are unimportant, tbf.
> 
> ...


So you don't know my position on independence for Scotland (I'm actually in favour, if a majority in Scotland want it), yet you assume because I'm in favour of Brexit, I must necessarily want to "dictate to others wanting an exit from the hideous UK".

You silly sausage.

And people's current whereabouts *are* important. It would be unreasonable for me to argue that my Scottish parentage entitles me to the same say in determining Scotland's future than anyone actually resident there, but for you with zero Scottish connection, past or present, to come on like this is frankly ridiculous.

And now I really am leaving this nonsense derail.


----------



## krtek a houby (Sep 9, 2021)

andysays said:


> So you don't know my position on independence for Scotland (I'm actually in favour, if a majority in Scotland want it), yet you assume because I'm in favour of Brexit, I must necessarily want to "dictate to others wanting an exit from the hideous UK".
> 
> You silly sausage.



Sorry, don't subscribe to your blog. 

You assume that this self has no connection to Scotland and because of my location, for some reason, shouldn't have a say?

There's Irish and Scottish republicans all over the world.

They have a right to decide their homelands future as well.


----------



## krtek a houby (Sep 9, 2021)

andysays said:


> And people's current whereabouts *are* important. It would be unreasonable for me to argue that my Scottish parentage entitles me to the same say in determining Scotland's future than anyone actually resident there, but for you with zero Scottish connection, past or present, to come on like this is frankly ridiculous.
> 
> And now I really am leaving this nonsense derail.



Sure, no sweat


----------



## emanymton (Sep 9, 2021)

krtek a houby said:


> Sure, no sweat


Finally bringing it back to the thread topic.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 10, 2021)

Papers served according to victims's lawyers:


----------



## TopCat (Sep 10, 2021)

At last.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 10, 2021)

I guess we don't actually have that daft American thing where you have to physically put the court papers into a person's hand after all, and that posting them to someone's primary residence is just fine.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 10, 2021)

SpookyFrank said:


> I guess we don't actually have that daft American thing where you have to physically put the court papers into a person's hand after all, and that posting them to someone's primary residence is just fine.


Kind of hoping that Windsor denies they've been served properly; that would really pile on the shame.
Wonder if the copper accepting the papers will be getting an promotion soon?


----------



## eatmorecheese (Sep 10, 2021)

I thought he was in Balmoral, sweating in the glens. I'm sure his people will forward the paperwork. Ho ho.


----------



## 1927 (Sep 10, 2021)

eatmorecheese said:


> I thought he was in Balmoral, sweating in the glens. I'm sure his people will forward the paperwork. Ho ho.


I think they were served some time ago!


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 10, 2021)

what does it mean though? it’s not going to make him get on a plane to the US, is it?


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 10, 2021)

SpookyFrank said:


> I guess we don't actually have that daft American thing where you have to physically put the court papers into a person's hand after all, and that posting them to someone's primary residence is just fine.


BBC article claims a process server went to Windsor and gave the papers to a police officer there after talking to lawyers. 

I thought the papers had to be physically given to the actual person too. A judge in the US will apparently now decide if the papers have been served in reality.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 10, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> BBC article claims a process server went to Windsor and gave the papers to a police officer there after talking to lawyers.
> 
> I thought the papers had to be physically given to the actual person too. A judge in the US will apparently now decide if the papers have been served in reality.


Sounds like a lawyers dream...just imagine the arguments that could rage around the notion of serving papers to an individual protected by the security state.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 10, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Sounds like a lawyers dream...just imagine the arguments that could rage around the notion of serving papers to an individual protected by the security state.


It's going to be argumentastic for the next few years. His side will undoubtedly argue the papers were not served, as the police officer was not empowered to accept them on behalf of Prince Andrew, whilst her side will argue they weren't allowed to serve them correctly and were effectively obstructed from doing so.


----------



## Cerv (Sep 10, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> what does it mean though? it’s not going to make him get on a plane to the US, is it?


if papers have been served and he doesn't go to court, then a default judgement against him in the plaintiff's favour will be recorded.

so wait and see now if he decides it'd be better to accept the case is happening and go make a defence, or try his luck on the court not accepting that the paperwork was served.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 10, 2021)

is this a civil or criminal case then ? if it civil in a US court, HRH might may a hefty slab of cash to lay out.

if found against him obvs.


----------



## Cerv (Sep 10, 2021)

not-bono-ever said:


> is this a civil or criminal case then ? if it civil in a US court, HRH might may a hefty slab of cash to lay out.
> 
> if found against him obvs.



it's civil


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 10, 2021)

Cerv said:


> it's civil



he had better declare bankruptcy then.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Sep 10, 2021)

SpookyFrank said:


> I guess we don't actually have that daft American thing where you have to physically put the court papers into a person's hand after all, and that posting them to someone's primary residence is just fine.


You do, but sort of don't, at least, not always.





__





						PART 6 - SERVICE OF DOCUMENTS - Civil Procedure Rules
					





					www.justice.gov.uk


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 11, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Sounds like a lawyers dream...just imagine the arguments that could rage around the notion of serving papers to an individual protected by the security state.



Seems this is the way they’re going. You’d have thought with all their dough they could afford advisors that have a fucking scoobie, really.


----------



## Badgers (Sep 11, 2021)

Top article on the BBC news?


----------



## Aladdin (Sep 11, 2021)

Badgers said:


> Top article on the BBC news?


Makes the whole "courtier complains about HaM" pale in significance. 

Hope the fecker gets jail but I somehow doubt it.


----------



## Spymaster (Sep 11, 2021)

Sugar Kane said:


> Makes the whole "courtier complains about HaM" pale in significance.
> 
> Hope the fecker gets jail but I somehow doubt it.


He can’t be jailed. It’s a civil action.


----------



## Cerv (Sep 11, 2021)

not-bono-ever said:


> he had better declare bankruptcy then.


could do an OJ and move to Florida.



Spymaster said:


> He can’t be jailed. It’s a civil action.


maybe if we're lucky he'll pull a contempt of court by ignoring the judgement, then somehow find himself in the US later.


----------



## Spymaster (Sep 11, 2021)

Cerv said:


> could do an OJ and move to Florida.
> 
> 
> maybe if we're lucky he'll pull a contempt of court by ignoring the judgement, then somehow find himself in the US later.


He will never go back to the US again and he won’t get extradited so this will likely end with him losing or settling this case then fucking off into obscurity.


----------



## andysays (Sep 11, 2021)

Badgers said:


> Top article on the BBC news?


Second after 9/11 stuff on the website.

This bit is interesting



> Our correspondent Nicholas Witchell said the tactics of Prince Andrew's legal team appeared to be just not to respond at all.





> "We should keep in mind that shortly after he did withdraw from public life, Prince Andrew did say he would co-operate with any legitimate inquiries by the US authorities," he told BBC's Radio 5 live. "I think it is fair to say the Americans would say that there has been little or indeed no evidence of any such co-operation by Prince Andrew."


----------



## Aladdin (Sep 11, 2021)

Spymaster said:


> He can’t be jailed. It’s a civil action.


Oh.. ok...well I hope they fleece him. 

Will there be a "guilty / not guilty" scenario? Or will he be able to settle out of court?


----------



## Aladdin (Sep 11, 2021)

Spymaster said:


> He will never go back to the US again and he won’t get extradited so this will likely end with him losing or settling this case then fucking off into obscurity.



So .. he will get away with it. 
😡


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 11, 2021)

He was always going to get away with it.


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 11, 2021)

Sugar Kane said:


> Oh.. ok...well I hope they fleece him.
> 
> Will there be a "guilty / not guilty" scenario? Or will he be able to settle out of court?


He will just ignore whatever the judge decides so long as he stays away from USA there  really isn't much anyone can do to enforce any penalty.
Most people already look at him like he's something they have just trod in so there is not even that.


----------



## andysays (Sep 11, 2021)

Sugar Kane said:


> So .. he will get away with it.
> 😡


In terms of avoiding getting involved in the case or paying any damages, I suspect he will get away with it.

But if he does effectively refuse to engage with the process, it will prevent him from ever visiting the US again, and cause further damage to his reputation and hopefully that of the whole Royal family.

I would imagine that the Queen or Prince Charles won't be able to visit the US in future without this case getting brought up, for instance.

Simply ignoring it won't mean it goes away.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 11, 2021)

Spymaster said:


> He will never go back to the US again and he won’t get extradited so this will likely end with him losing or settling this case then fucking off into obscurity.



We won’t extradite him, but rapist nonce Polanski was held by the Swiss for quite some time while they mulled it over. Andrew’s ski chalet is in Verbier, can’t quite remember what country that is in…


----------



## Athos (Sep 11, 2021)

andysays said:


> In terms of avoiding getting involved in the case or paying any damages, I suspect he will get away with it.
> 
> But if he does effectively refuse to engage with the process, it will prevent him from ever visiting the US again, and cause further damage to his reputation and hopefully that of the whole Royal family.
> 
> ...


He already faces the possibility of arrest if he goes to the US, and his reputation is shot. He'd be stupid to do anything but completely ignore the US proceedings; as long as he does that, any judgement against him would be unenforceable here. But, if he tries to defend the case (on any grounds but jurisdiction), he runs the risk of losing and the claimant then being able to enforce the US court's judgement here, at common law, as a debt.

TLDR: Of course he'll escape justice.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 11, 2021)

It seems his legal team are pinning their hopes on a payout Epstein made to her that covered Dershowitz, they say that is should cover sweaty Andy too. Would be surprised if the court sees it that way.


----------



## steveseagull (Sep 11, 2021)

Would he be able to go to EU countries? I am pretty sure they have extradition treaties with the US.


----------



## Spymaster (Sep 11, 2021)

Sugar Kane said:


> So .. he will get away with it.
> 😡


In terms of staying out of jail, yes. He’s never going to do any time unless he’s stupid enough to go to America and even then it’d be a long shot. That said the whole world thinks he’s a revolting, lying, sleazebag, and always will. For the rest of his life he’ll be confined to a small circle of like-minded cunts and be ridiculed and abused if he tries to step outside it. Not sure I’d call that “getting away with it”.


----------



## andysays (Sep 11, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> We won’t extradite him, but rapist nonce Polanski was held by the Swiss for quite some time while they mulled it over. Andrew’s ski chalet is in Verbier, can’t quite remember what country that is in…





steveseagull said:


> Would he be able to go to EU countries? I am pretty sure they have extradition treaties with the US.


Extradition only applies in (some) criminal cases. This is a civil case.

I understand people want to see the sweaty nonce banged up, but let's not get over-excited and start fantasising about something which is never going to happen.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Sep 11, 2021)

Spymaster said:


> In terms of staying out of jail, yes. He’s never going to do any time unless he’s stupid enough to go to America and even then it’d be a long shot. *That said the whole world thinks he’s a revolting, lying, sleazebag, and always will. For the rest of his life he’ll be confined to a small circle of like-minded cunts and be ridiculed and abused if he tries to step outside it*. Not sure I’d call that “getting away with it”.


So life as normal, then.


----------



## Aladdin (Sep 11, 2021)

Spymaster said:


> In terms of staying out of jail, yes. He’s never going to do any time unless he’s stupid enough to go to America and even then it’d be a long shot. That said the whole world thinks he’s a revolting, lying, sleazebag, and always will. For the rest of his life he’ll be confined to a small circle of like-minded cunts and be ridiculed and abused if he tries to step outside it. Not sure I’d call that “getting away with it”.




I'd say he will  be surrounded by the same twats and nonces he already has around him. 
He clearly has no moral compass and has been involved in dodgy business deals in the past. He's a scumbag and it hasnt bothered him before now. So I'd say he will not be as impacted as an ordinary person might be. 

The royal courtiers will still bow and scrape and the family will still be there for him..maybe not so much openly but they'll support him privately..because of who he is. And because royalty have gotten away with this type of shit for as long as there has been royalty


----------



## agricola (Sep 11, 2021)

Spymaster said:


> In terms of staying out of jail, yes. He’s never going to do any time unless he’s stupid enough to go to America and even then it’d be a long shot. That said the whole world thinks he’s a revolting, lying, sleazebag, and always will. For the rest of his life he’ll be confined to a small circle of like-minded cunts and be ridiculed and abused if he tries to step outside it. Not sure I’d call that “getting away with it”.



TBF his main use now is probably to be the figurehead of this, the reason why further investigations into the people around Epstein (people who had much more power, money and influence than he ever had) can't happen.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 11, 2021)

Let’s wait and see what the fragrant Ms Maxwell has to say for herself come November when it starts to dawn on her that the next twenty years of her life won’t be as she’d imagined they’d be…


----------



## keybored (Sep 11, 2021)

Fingers crossed for US drone strike on Balmoral when found guilty.


----------



## pseudonarcissus (Sep 11, 2021)

Sugar Kane said:


> He clearly has no moral compass and has been involved in dodgy business deals in the past. He's a scumbag and it hasnt bothered him before now. So I'd say he will not be as impacted as an ordinary person might be.


the fact that he was such a security risk still amazes me. It’s surprising Putin hasn’t released a video of what was happening on Epstein Island…or maybe that will come out later.

I wonder if they will try and go against the family firm’s assets.


----------



## pseudonarcissus (Sep 11, 2021)

pseudonarcissus said:


> the fact that he was such a security risk still amazes me. It’s surprising Putin hasn’t released a video of what was happening on Epstein Island…or maybe that will come out later.
> 
> Absolute fucking negligence on the part of the FSB if they don’t


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 11, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Let’s wait and see what the fragrant Ms Maxwell has to say for herself come November when it starts to dawn on her that the next twenty years of her life won’t be as she’d imagined they’d be…


I warrant she will be unalive by the time of a full scale trial


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 11, 2021)

He will probably claim to be a 'Freeman-on-the-land', with exemption from jurisdiction, quoting a load of old bollocks from the magna carta or admiralty law.


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 11, 2021)

andysays said:


> Extradition only applies in (some) criminal cases. This is a civil case.
> 
> I understand people want to see the sweaty nonce banged up, but let's not get over-excited and start fantasising about something which is never going to happen.


he can’t even be arrested if he stays in a royal palace. if he does leave the grounds, he’d have to go with the Queen as no one can be arrested in her presence. as if it would ever happen anyway


----------



## Wilf (Sep 11, 2021)

All this stops him resuming any kind of 'normal life' and reduces his chiseling opportunities.  But I don't think the various state authorities in this country or even New York are going want to see it going anywhere near a criminal prosecution or extradition.  As mentioned above, the maxwell trial must be his real worry.  That's just about the only thing that could tip the Met over into a proper investigation (haven't they merely promised some kind of 'review' at the moment?).  Even then, that would be just about the last thing that Pritti Patel or Cressida Dick would want though, in such a thought experiment, it would be a great opportunity for some senior detective to make their name.


----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 11, 2021)

keybored said:


> Fingers crossed for US drone strike on Balmoral when found guilty.


On past record they would probably miss Balmoral and hit a wedding in the local village.


----------



## keybored (Sep 11, 2021)

Sprocket. said:


> On past record they would probably miss Balmoral and hit a wedding in the local village.


Despite Balmoral being 50,000 acres, I suspect you're correct.


----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 11, 2021)

keybored said:


> Despite Balmoral being 50,000 acres, I suspect you're correct.


They’ve got previous!


----------



## andysays (Sep 11, 2021)

An entirely predictable development

*Prince Andrew's team dispute claims accuser served legal papers*


----------



## Saul Goodman (Sep 11, 2021)

andysays said:


> An entirely predictable development
> 
> *Prince Andrew's team dispute claims accuser served legal papers*


100% predictable. He's going to bury his head in the sand and simply stay away from the US. Any other course of action would only make things worse for him/them.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 11, 2021)

Sugar Kane said:


> Makes the whole "courtier complains about HaM" pale in significance.
> 
> Hope the fecker gets jail but I somehow doubt it.


This is a civil hearing, so no jail (not yet at least).


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 11, 2021)

andysays said:


> An entirely predictable development
> 
> *Prince Andrew's team dispute claims accuser served legal papers*


Shocked I tell you shocked.


----------



## neonwilderness (Sep 11, 2021)




----------



## equationgirl (Sep 11, 2021)

neonwilderness said:


> View attachment 287875


Accurate, I feel.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 12, 2021)

Tennis related for those who've not yet had their coffee


----------



## MrSki (Sep 12, 2021)

I seem to be posting on the wrong threads this morning.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 13, 2021)

Not ignoring, but contesting the service.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 13, 2021)

__





						Prince Andrew to challenge US court jurisdiction in sexual assault lawsuit
					





					www.msn.com
				




Planning to challenge the court's jurisdiction.

And if that doesn't work, claiming the papers were not properly served.

Willing to assist, my arse!


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 13, 2021)

All these manoeuvres simply mean he’s guilty in the eyes of public opinion which is what the monarchy relies upon to survive.


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 13, 2021)

I continue to be amazed how badly he continues to fuck up the public relationship side of things.  It's a pity he's not the eldest really, we would be a republic a week after he ascended to the throne.


----------



## two sheds (Sep 13, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> I continue to be amazed how badly he continues to fuck up the public relationship side of things.  It's a pity he's not the eldest really, we would be a republic a week after he ascended to the throne.


what number is he in line to the throne?


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 13, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> I continue to be amazed how badly he continues to fuck up the public relationship side of things.  It's a pity he's not the eldest really, we would be a republic a week after he ascended to the throne.


They’re probably in for a rough ride anyway. People like the Queen but many don’t forgive Charles for how he treated Diana and he’s presently got a scandal of his own brewing with cash for knighthoods.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 13, 2021)

Contesting the service is a weak response. Noncery shitbag


----------



## DaveCinzano (Sep 13, 2021)

BUT I HAD MY FINGERS CROSSED


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Sep 13, 2021)

two sheds said:


> what number is he in line to the throne?



9 - fairly low down in the grand scheme of things now, as it goes along the line of first child (or until recently first son), then children of first child, so old big ears is next, then william, then william's brats, then harry, then harry's brats, then the sweatless wonder.

the change from first son to first child wasn't retrospective, so anne (who's second child of HMtQ) is still after Edward (and his brats)

more here

pity, really - he's an even bigger advert for the republic than jug ears...


----------



## two sheds (Sep 13, 2021)

Let's just hope the first eight don't gather together in a dangerous situation


----------



## DaveCinzano (Sep 13, 2021)

two sheds said:


> Let's just hope the first eight don't gather together in a dangerous situation


What, like a recorded deposition?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 13, 2021)

not-bono-ever said:


> Contesting the service is a weak response. Noncery shitbag



Especially as the first time they tried to serve them the copper on the gate, paid for by me and you told him that they were under orders not to accept any court papers.


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 13, 2021)

two sheds said:


> what number is he in line to the throne?


Number 9 now, there are apprently somewhere between four and five thousand on the list (though I would imagine many of the higher numbered ones probably don't know they are)
This is the top 62 (all of them related to Brenda by no more than a generation or two) She probably knows all of this shower.









						Succession to the British throne - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## two sheds (Sep 13, 2021)

DaveCinzano said:


> What, like a recorded deposition?


Or a balloon trip


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Sep 13, 2021)

two sheds said:


> Let's just hope the first eight don't gather together in a dangerous situation



don't they have rules about not letting too many of them travel on the same plane and that sort of thing?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 13, 2021)

Puddy_Tat said:


> don't they have rules about not letting too many of them travel on the same plane and that sort of thing?



That’s Coca Cola.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Sep 13, 2021)

Puddy_Tat said:


> don't they have rules about not letting too many of them travel on the same plane and that sort of thing?


I think that was Gremlins and feeding after midnight. 
Although I reckon we'll soon see a rule about royals named Andrew giving interviews.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Sep 13, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> I think that was Gremlins and feeding after midnight.



easily confused...


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 13, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Especially as the first time they tried to serve them the copper on the gate, paid for by me and you told him that they were under orders not to accept any court papers.





Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Especially as the first time they tried to serve them the copper on the gate, paid for by me and you told him that they were under orders not to accept any court papers.


 
it’s citizens arrest time for the British public then. Let’s hope it goes better that Thatchells one on Mugabe


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 13, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> I think that was Gremlins and feeding after midnight.
> Although I reckon we'll soon see a rule about royals named Andrew giving interviews.


I think many attempted to warn him against his Newsnight appearance but arrogance and entitlement meant he didn’t listen. He appears to be continuing in that vein.


----------



## Santino (Sep 13, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> That’s Coca Cola.


Why would there be rules about not letting too many of them travel on the same Coca Cola? That doesn't even make sense.


----------



## krtek a houby (Sep 13, 2021)

All this stress can't be good for him. 

Anything could happen to him.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 13, 2021)

DaveCinzano said:


> What, like a recorded deposition?


Like a Nepalese gun fight


----------



## krtek a houby (Sep 13, 2021)

two sheds said:


> Let's just hope the first eight don't gather together in a dangerous situation


The Hateful Eight


----------



## andysays (Sep 14, 2021)

Prince Andrew's lawyer says NY case is baseless and non-viable​I don't know if it's really significant, but he/his lawyers now seem to have switched from simply saying he didn't do it to all sorts of legalistic wriggling - the papers weren't properly served, the US court doesn't have jurisdiction, and this one



> "There has been a settlement agreement that the plaintiff [Ms Giuffre] has entered into in a prior action that releases the duke and others from any and all potential liability,"


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 14, 2021)

andysays said:


> Prince Andrew's lawyer says NY case is baseless and non-viable​I don't know if it's really significant, but he/his lawyers now seem to have switched from simply saying he didn't do it to all sorts of legalistic wriggling - the papers weren't properly served, the US court doesn't have jurisdiction, and this one



The agreement thing, his lawyers haven’t even seen it, it is not public and they have requested a copy from the court. In the meantime them saying it absolves him from his crimes is speculation on their part, as baseless as their claim that her claim is baseless…

Wait and see, I have a feeling that things might not go Andrew’s way here.

A nice line I saw on Twitter yesterday was, “Call him Andrew Mountbatten Windsor, not HRH or Duke, come on guys, we fought a revolution to get rid of these people!”


----------



## Athos (Sep 14, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Especially as the first time they tried to serve them the copper on the gate, paid for by me and you told him that they were under orders not to accept any court papers.


It's funny how they claim to stay out of civil matters, but show up to assist bailiffs.


----------



## dessiato (Sep 14, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Is he going to claim Magna Carta and FOTL (or the American equivalent) so he doesn't recognise the court jurisdiction?


----------



## Glitter (Sep 14, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Tennis related for those who've not yet had their coffee



@beardedgenius is my mate. I love it when I see his tweets somewhere like here


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 14, 2021)

I know when I haven’t done something I definitely always enter into prior agreements releasing me and others from any and all liability.


----------



## Athos (Sep 14, 2021)

danny la rouge said:


> I know when I haven’t done something I definitely always enter into prior agreements releasing me and others from any and all liability.


I don't think he entered into any agreement (prior or otherwise). Rather, he trying to claim the settlement his alleged victim reached with Epstein prevents her from pursuing him. Though he seems to concede that he's not seen the terms of it!


----------



## MrCurry (Sep 14, 2021)

Athos said:


> I don't think he entered into any agreement (prior or otherwise). Rather, he trying to claim the settlement his alleged victim reached with Epstein prevents her from pursuing him. Though he seems to concede that he's not seen the terms of it!


Clearly he’s never colluded with Epstein or his representatives in connection with this matter. Plain as day, that.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 14, 2021)

Athos said:


> I don't think he entered into any agreement (prior or otherwise). Rather, he trying to claim the settlement his alleged victim reached with Epstein prevents her from pursuing him. Though he seems to concede that he's not seen the terms of it!


It’s a fantastic line of argument if he wants to sound as guilty as possible.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 14, 2021)

Would be surprised if this agreement with a now dead nonce would apply to HRH unless he was specifically named in the agreement in the first place.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 14, 2021)

not-bono-ever said:


> Would be surprised if this agreement with a now dead nonce would apply to HRH unless he was specifically named in the agreement in the first place.


Yeah, would be a good look to grasp at a clause that prevents the victim from pursuing any of Epstein's fellow rapists, nonces and sex traffickers. Reckon Maxwell's case shows that's fantasy land anyway.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 14, 2021)

Let’s see that secret agreement!


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 14, 2021)

Her claim can't be baseless on the grounds that it didn't happen if as HWCS's lawyers argue a deal has previously been reach to absolve him of responsibility for his actions, it can only be baseless on the basis that the agreement stops him being done for his noncery. That's pretty much what his own lawyer has just argued. If the agreement doesn't cover him it will be quite hard to then argue that he never done it.

Anyone got any more popcorn?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 14, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Her claim can't be baseless on the grounds that it didn't happen if as HWCS's lawyers argue a deal has previously been reach to absolve him of responsibility for his actions, it can only be baseless on the basis that the agreement stops him being done for his noncery. That's pretty much what his own lawyer has just argued. If the agreement doesn't cover him it will be quite hard to then argue that he never done it.
> 
> Anyone got any more popcorn?


Have some pizza express tiramisu


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 14, 2021)

not-bono-ever said:


> Would be surprised if this agreement with a now dead nonce would apply to HRH unless he was specifically named in the agreement in the first place.


Not sure hrn (his royal nonceship) would want to be named in a document like that which would suggest there were other women who might have a claim on him


----------



## Athos (Sep 14, 2021)

MrCurry said:


> Clearly he’s never colluded with Epstein or his representatives in connection with this matter. Plain as day, that.


It's is a bit strange that he says he doesn't have a copy, though. If he does he'd adduce it if it helped him; if it didn't help him, he'd not try to rely on it, surely.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 14, 2021)

would it be a crap lawyer that allowed their clientto sign off on unknown things that might pop up in the future ? Pretty sure that when I signed off on stuff like this, my brief scored out this section of the agreement  on principle


----------



## Athos (Sep 14, 2021)

danny la rouge said:


> It’s a fantastic line of argument if he wants to sound as guilty as possible.


Yeah, the whole jurisdiction, service, settlement arguments - rather than engaging with the substance of the claim - are a PR disaster. But, you have to suspect that's the least bad option for him, and wonder what that says.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 14, 2021)

Athos said:


> It's is a bit strange that he says he doesn't have a copy, though. If he does he'd adduce it if it helped him; if it didn't help him, he'd not try to rely on it, surely.




AFAIK Dershowitz got off a battery charge on the strength of it, but it is all cloudy and marks down anyone trying to use it as 100% guilty.

What do Americans call deckchairs?


----------



## Spymaster (Sep 14, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Her claim can't be baseless on the grounds that it didn't happen if as HWCS's lawyers argue a deal has previously been reach to absolve him of responsibility for his actions, it can only be baseless on the basis that the agreement stops him being done for his noncery. That's pretty much what his own lawyer has just argued. If the agreement doesn't cover him it will be quite hard to then argue that he never done it.
> 
> Anyone got any more popcorn?



IF such an agreement exists it could just be a confidentiality agreement preventing her from discussing anything relating to Shitstein or his associates, not noncery, although the further they pursue this route, the more convinced everyone is of his guilt. 

Andrew is followed pretty much everywhere by royal protection officers. They will have logs of where he's been and when. If he was having a pizza in Woking, release the logs and end all this.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 14, 2021)

could she launch this action in the UK ? I warrant we would see the end of it if a move to see this in the high court was proposed


----------



## Athos (Sep 14, 2021)

It's not impossible to have a settlement agreement that includes all claims against any party relating to the same facts/allegations.  And quite likely that Epstein would've sought to protect Maxwell that way.  Andrew might just be able to bring himself within that protection, even if not named.  How shit does that look, though?  You can't sue me, because my nonce friend paid you off.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 14, 2021)

not-bono-ever said:


> could she launch this action in the UK ? I warrant we would see the end of it if a move to see this in the high court was proposed




If the US judgement goes against him that must surely open the door to a formal police enquiry (again) in the UK. If she was trafficked against her will and made to shag him, that is rape. If she were a willing partner shagging him for money, having it away with a prostitute who is under 18 is a crime in the UK....


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 14, 2021)

Spymaster said:


> If he was having a pizza in Woking, release the logs and end all this.


That’s a terrible alibi, though. “It can’t have been me because earlier that evening I’d been a short drive away having a pizza”.  Nobody ever had a pizza and then went on to a club.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Sep 14, 2021)

His legal team's just started a press conference where they are patting themselves on the back over their nuanced strategy


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 14, 2021)

Spymaster said:


> IF such an agreement exists it could just be a confidentiality agreement preventing her from discussing anything relating to Shitstein or his associates, not noncery, although the further they pursue this route, the more convinced everyone is of his guilt.
> 
> Andrew is followed pretty much everywhere by royal protection officers. They will have logs of where he's been and when. If he was having a pizza in Woking, release the logs and end all this.


Release the card receipts or bank statement showing payment to pizza express.


----------



## bluescreen (Sep 14, 2021)

One thing I don't understand about Windsor's lawyer trying to rely on the Giuffre/Epstein deal is how Windsor could enforce it if he's not a party to the contract. Surely it's only Epstein and his heirs and assigns? Or did Epstein assign a right to Windsor? Or what? Is it not a contract but some other beast?
 It's a long time since I studied contract law, which is roughly the same in principle in the US as here.


----------



## keybored (Sep 14, 2021)

Santino said:


> Why would there be rules about not letting too many of them travel on the same Coca Cola? That doesn't even make sense.


It's in case they accidentally the whole bottle.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 14, 2021)

He probably paid in maundy money - no paper trail


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 14, 2021)

Athos said:


> It's not impossible to have a settlement agreement that includes all claims against any party relating to the same facts/allegations.  And quite likely that Epstein would've sought to protect Maxwell that way.  Andrew might just be able to bring himself within that protection, even if not named.  How shit does that look, though?  You can't sue me, because my nonce friend paid you off.


 But any agreement would not override illegality and shit I assume


----------



## Athos (Sep 14, 2021)

not-bono-ever said:


> But any agreement would not override illegality and shit I assume


Not for the purposes of criminal proceedings. But these are civil.


----------



## Athos (Sep 14, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> If the US judgement goes against him that must surely open the door to a formal police enquiry (again) in the UK. If she was trafficked against her will and made to shag him, that is rape. If she were a willing partner shagging him for money, having it away with a prostitute who is under 18 is a crime in the UK....



I'm not sure what the legal position was at the time of the alleged offence.  What section of what act are you thinking of?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 14, 2021)

Athos said:


> I'm not sure what the legal position was at the time of the alleged offence.  What section of what act are you thinking of?



I understand the Sexual Offences Act 2003 which explicitly covers both scenarios won't count as he wasn't sweating in Tramp in 2001. But I am pretty sure that going with a prostitute who was under 18 was an offence before then, (would need to dig out old laws and really can't be fucked). And having sex with someone against their will was very much an offence prior to 2003...


----------



## bluescreen (Sep 14, 2021)

Athos said:


> It's not impossible to have a settlement agreement that includes all claims against any party relating to the same facts/allegations.  And quite likely that Epstein would've sought to protect Maxwell that way.  Andrew might just be able to bring himself within that protection, even if not named.  How shit does that look, though?  You can't sue me, because my nonce friend paid you off.


Yes, but how under contract law is it enforceable by someone who wasn't actually a party to it?


----------



## Athos (Sep 14, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I understand the Sexual Offences Act 2003 which explicitly covers both scenarios won't count as he wasn't sweating in Tramp in 2001. But I am pretty sure that going with a prostitute who was under 18 was an offence before then, (would need to dig out old laws and really can't be fucked). And having sex with someone against their will was very much an offence prior to 2003...


I'm not sure on the under 18 prostitute part. And, I suspect that there's a subjective element of the consent issue i.e. whether someone had a reasonable belief in consent.  Basically, I think they'll be enough wriggle room for him to evade a criminal prosecution. Sadly.


----------



## Athos (Sep 14, 2021)

bluescreen said:


> Yes, but how under contract law is it enforceable by someone who wasn't actually a party to it?



I'd have to look into the 'privity of contact' issue, but I'm pretty sure settlements are covered by Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999, now.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Sep 14, 2021)

Fairly confident that at some point he will claim that he _stands under that Magna Carta gives him droit de seigneur _


----------



## bluescreen (Sep 14, 2021)

Athos said:


> I'd have to look into the 'privity of contact' issue, but I'm pretty sure settlements are covered by Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999, now.


Good point re UK law - but in the USA?


----------



## Athos (Sep 14, 2021)

bluescreen said:


> Good point re UK law - but in the USA?


I think privity is even weaker there.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 14, 2021)

DaveCinzano said:


> Fairly confident that at some point he will claim that he _stands under that Magna Carta gives him droit de seigneur _


He’s definitely got something to do with barons.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 14, 2021)

not-bono-ever said:


> He probably paid in maundy money - no paper trail


Pauper trail, shurely?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 14, 2021)

two sheds said:


> what number is he in line to the throne?



Dunno actually. Depends if Harry and his kids Cletus and Susie-Lee are still on the team sheet


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 14, 2021)

two sheds said:


> what number is he in line to the throne?


Currently 9th apparently.


----------



## steveseagull (Sep 14, 2021)




----------



## Santino (Sep 14, 2021)

danny la rouge said:


> Currently 9th apparently.


Your encyclopedic knowledge of royal matters is an inspiration to us all, Danny.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 14, 2021)

Santino said:


> Your encyclopedic knowledge of royal matters is an inspiration to us all, Danny.


Know your enemy.  Or at least be able to look up Wikipedia.


----------



## steveseagull (Sep 14, 2021)

They want to remarry... if the nonce stuff goes away









						Prince Andrew and Sarah Ferguson 'keen to re-marry after sex abuse claims'
					

The Duke of York and his ex-wife divorced in 1996 but have always remained close friends and even live together. Sources claim the pair could reunite if he is able to move on from claims he sexually assaulted Virginia Giuffre when she was 17




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 14, 2021)

Puddy_Tat said:


> 9 - fairly low down in the grand scheme of things now, as it goes along the line of first child (or until recently first son), then children of first child, so old big ears is next, then william, then william's brats, then harry, then harry's brats, then the sweatless wonder.
> 
> the change from first son to first child wasn't retrospective, so anne (who's second child of HMtQ) is still after Edward (and his brats)
> 
> ...





danny la rouge said:


> Know your enemy.  Or at least be able to look up Wikipedia.


Or read the thread


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 14, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> Or read the thread


Oh Christ no.  Pick a few posts and argue with those.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 14, 2021)

steveseagull said:


> They want to remarry... if the nonce stuff goes away
> 
> 
> 
> ...


"If any of you know cause or just impediment, why these two persons should not be joined together in holy Matrimony, ye are to declare it"
- Well, yeah, he's a nonce.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 14, 2021)

There's an interesting question for the royal protection officers, or whatever group of plod defend the beast in his lair: _if the papers weren't served, where are they now? Did they bin them?_


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 14, 2021)

Wilf said:


> There's an interesting question for the royal protection officers, or whatever group of plod defend the beast in his lair: _if the papers weren't served, where are they now? Did they bin them?_


Rumour has it they reached the prince who was apoplectic at their contents, dropping his trousers in front of his rpos and wiping his arse with the documents.


----------



## kenny g (Sep 14, 2021)

Athos said:


> It's funny how they claim to stay out of civil matters, but show up to assist bailiffs.


It is US civil claim so can basically piss off in terms of getting UK police assistance.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 14, 2021)

'Letter for you milord'
- _Cheers serf, what is it... [rip]... DOH!_


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 14, 2021)

This isn’t going to go away for him is it ?


----------



## ruffneck23 (Sep 14, 2021)

not-bono-ever said:


> This isn’t going to go away for him is it ?


Good.

And Ferguson should dump him if she had any integrity, but she knows a payout when she sees one.


----------



## Flavour (Sep 14, 2021)

This is so good. I think this is much much better than Harry fucking off in terms of the ongoing Royal Decline that poor Liz has had to oversee


----------



## Wilf (Sep 14, 2021)

If 'Fergie' ever hosts another _It's a Royal Knockout_, the teams could compete to deliver a letter, say to a grumpy prince.  Costume wise, they'd be dressed as disgraced Radio 1 presenters, climbing over polystyrene walls and doing battle with servants armed with shotguns ('it was just a shooting party').  Stuart Hall is now free to do the voiceover.  Due to Brexit, the winners won't be competing in _Je Sans Frontier_.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 14, 2021)

Wilf said:


> If 'Fergie' ever hosts another _It's a Royal Knockout_, the teams could compete to deliver a letter, say to a grumpy prince.  Costume wise, they'd be dressed as disgraced Radio 1 presenters, climbing over polystyrene walls and doing battle with servants armed with shotguns ('it was just a shooting party').  Stuart Hall is now free to do the voiceover.  Due to Brexit, the winners won't be competing in _Je Sans Frontier_.


Jeux sans frontieres.

Je means i


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 14, 2021)

Flavour said:


> This is so good. I think this is much much better than Harry fucking off in terms of the ongoing Royal Decline that poor Liz has had to oversee


Thats because there's a new scriptwriter


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 14, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> Jeux sans frontieres.
> 
> Je means i


Je suis un beignet


----------



## Wilf (Sep 14, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> Jeux sans frontieres.


 ... well, that's why they won't be competing in it.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Sep 14, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> Jeux sans frontieres.
> 
> Je means i


----------



## Combustible (Sep 14, 2021)

Flavour said:


> This is so good. I think this is much much better than Harry fucking off in terms of the ongoing Royal Decline that poor Liz has had to oversee


The one perk of her living so long is that she is still alive to see it.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 14, 2021)

Wilf said:


> There's an interesting question for the royal protection officers, or whatever group of plod defend the beast in his lair: _if the papers weren't served, where are they now? Did they bin them?_



Well if you will give written documents to people who can't read.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 14, 2021)

Hague convention and shit - I’m pretty sure there was this mechanism for dumping papers to a random in his own country . I cannot recall anything else if this - do the papers actually have to received in hand to formalise the action ?


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 14, 2021)

not-bono-ever said:


> Hague convention and shit - I’m pretty sure there was this mechanism for dumping papers to a random in his own country . I cannot recall anything else if this - do the papers actually have to received in hand to formalise the action ?


I remember when Berezovsky was attempting to serve papers to Abromovich there was a cat and mouse game around Sloane Square or some such.


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 14, 2021)

I would imagine Guffrie's lawyers would have to demonstrate to the judge they have made every reasonable effort to serve the papers, othewise it would be like the old Milk Tray adverts with somebody swinging through the window to leave it on his bedside.
Giving it to a Plod strikes me as about as reasonable as it can get,  Any reasonable person would expect a Plod to pass it up the chain of command and at some point it would end up in the grubbies of one of He Who Cannot Sweat's flunkies.
Any reasonable person would assume a flunky would draw legal papers to the attention of the person he flunks for.  It's up to the judge to decide but I don't think the "It wasn't served" argument is going to impress him.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 14, 2021)

not-bono-ever said:


> Hague convention and shit - I’m pretty sure there was this mechanism for dumping papers to a random in his own country . I cannot recall anything else if this - do the papers actually have to received in hand to formalise the action ?




It's fucking bobbins, some bloke with big hair has popped up and said he's representing the slimy nonce, hand the shit to him and it's should be done.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 14, 2021)

Athos said:


> I don't think he entered into any agreement (prior or otherwise). Rather, he trying to claim the settlement his alleged victim reached with Epstein prevents her from pursuing him. Though he seems to concede that he's not seen the terms of it!


Classy that. 

If they fail on this and it does end up in court, you wonder how sweaty's lawyers will play it?  He's already gone with 'I don't remember meeting her' and strongly implied the picture is pixels.  They'll no doubt have a go at saying he wasn't in location x on day y, though I think they've already fucked up on that (one of epstein's servants said they'd seen him?).  They'll also have a go at suggesting her story hasn't been consistent or similar.  Ultimately though, they can't fall back on 'it was consensual', having previously said it didn't happen.

I doubt he'll get a judgement against him, but who knows.  Ultimately though, he's hedged himself in a bit (well, mainly by being guilty).


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 14, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> I would imagine Guffrie's lawyers would have to demonstrate to the judge they have made every reasonable effort to serve the papers, othewise it would be like the old Milk Tray adverts with somebody swinging through the window to leave it on his bedside.
> Giving it to a Plod strikes me as about as reasonable as it can get,  Any reasonable person would expect a Plod to pass it up the chain of command and at some point it would end up in the grubbies of one of He Who Cannot Sweat's flunkies.
> Any reasonable person would assume a flunky would draw legal papers to the attention of the person he flunks for.  It's up to the judge to decide but I don't think the "It wasn't served" argument is going to impress him.




“Don’t answer it, son!”


----------



## Athos (Sep 14, 2021)

Wilf said:


> Classy that.
> 
> If they fail on this and it does end up in court, you wonder how sweaty's lawyers will play it?  He's already gone with 'I don't remember meeting her' and strongly implied the picture is pixels.  They'll no doubt have a go at saying he wasn't in location x on day y, though I think they've already fucked up on that (one of epstein's servants said they'd seen him?).  They'll also have a go at suggesting her story hasn't been consistent or similar.  Ultimately though, they can't fall back on 'it was consensual', having previously said it didn't happen.
> 
> I doubt he'll get a judgement against him, but who knows.  Ultimately though, he's hedged himself in a bit (well, mainly by being guilty).


I think his US lawyers will argue three technical preliminary issues: jurisdiction, service, and that the claim has been settled. If he doesn't succeed on them, then I suspect he won't engage further, for risk of making any judgement against him enforceable in the English courts.  Unless he's so confident that he'll succeed (which, for a normal person, would suggest you've got some killer evidence, but for an entitled prick might just be arrogance).


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 14, 2021)

bluescreen said:


> One thing I don't understand about Windsor's lawyer trying to rely on the Giuffre/Epstein deal is how Windsor could enforce it if he's not a party to the contract. Surely it's only Epstein and his heirs and assigns? Or did Epstein assign a right to Windsor? Or what? Is it not a contract but some other beast?
> It's a long time since I studied contract law, which is roughly the same in principle in the US as here.


Well there's a piece of English law called the Contracts  (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 (as Athos has mentioned) which in some cases allows a party who isn't a party to a contract to enforce rights under said contract, but I doubt the advisers are relying on that simply because the prior agreement is unlikely to be under English law, having been (as far as I can tell) concluded in the US.

You can't pick an choose which laws apply just because it's convenient for you.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 14, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> It's fucking bobbins, some bloke with big hair has popped up and said he's representing the slimy nonce, hand the shit to him and it's should be done.


Wasn't there something about the law firm representing him refusing to accept any papers being served on him?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 14, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> Wasn't there something about the law firm representing him refusing to accept any papers being served on him?




AFAIK her lawyers sent copies to various firms of lawyers who had connections to him. But surely if he has engaged a firm to act on his behalf in this case they can be handed the papers and get we're off..?


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 14, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> AFAIK her lawyers sent copies to various firms of lawyers who had connections to him. But surely if he has engaged a firm to act on his behalf in this case they can be handed the papers and get we're off..?


I would have said say, being a sensible and logical person. The law firm in question may refuse to accept any papers attempted to be served on a client, for their own reasons. I can imagine the process server had a big list of potential places to serve the papers on his HRH and not been successful, hence giving up and leaving them with the plod at Windsor.

But said list will be useful to the defence team, who will be able to show that they tried pretty damn hard to serve HRH.

I expect former lawyers would not accept the papers if he was no longer a client.


----------



## TopCat (Sep 14, 2021)

Its heating up!


----------



## Johnny Doe (Sep 14, 2021)

Do we think in private, Lizzy is ripping him a new one?


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 14, 2021)

Harry Smiles said:


> Do we think in private, Lizzy is ripping him a new one?


No, we don’t.


----------



## Johnny Doe (Sep 14, 2021)

danny la rouge said:


> No, we don’t.


For being so shit at not hiding it, I meant? No doubt she thinks her spawn are entitled to do exactly as they pleased, but surely she's pissed off abot the interview/pizza express/no sweat rubbish


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 14, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> I would have said say, being a sensible and logical person. The law firm in question may refuse to accept any papers attempted to be served on a client, for their own reasons. I can imagine the process server had a big list of potential places to serve the papers on his HRH and not been successful, hence giving up and leaving them with the plod at Windsor.
> 
> But said list will be useful to the defence team, who will be able to show that they tried pretty damn hard to serve HRH.
> 
> I expect former lawyers would not accept the papers if he was no longer a client.




Yeah, outfits like Matrix Churchill could quite rightly say no, but he was represented in court yesterday (video conference) by some LA attorney, surely the judge could just dump the papers on him and move on?


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 14, 2021)

Harry Smiles said:


> For being so shit at not hiding it, I meant? No doubt she thinks her spawn are entitled to do exactly as they pleased, but surely she's pissed off abot the interview/pizza express/no sweat rubbish


I think she’s probably more annoyed at the media for not knowing their place.  But, yeah, I’m sure even she thinks the no sweat stuff was fucking stupid.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 14, 2021)

Hang on , I’m sure I read somewhere that someone else she may have approached in the US to sue, sidestepped it because of these mysterious OOC papers. Does this ring any bells ?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 14, 2021)

Am googling this


----------



## Johnny Doe (Sep 14, 2021)

danny la rouge said:


> I think she’s probably more annoyed at the media for not knowing their place.  But, yeah, I’m sure even she thinks the no sweat stuff was fucking stupid.


If she gets too pissed off she might be looking for someone who could get the corgis to eat him alive. Who do we know with an unatural ability to control dogs behaviour?


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 14, 2021)

Harry Smiles said:


> Do we think in private, Lizzy is ripping him a new one?


Seriously doubt it even setting aside the fact that she is the Queen, she's still his mother and mothers are often blind to the failings of their offspring, the not my baby he's a good boy and it must be a mistake jag.
One gets the impression that Chucky is less than happy with him though.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Sep 14, 2021)

Harry Smiles said:


> Do we think in private, Lizzy is ripping him a new one?


By all accounts one thing Liz has been acutely aware of throughout her reign is the importance of PR and the public face of the royals. The whole “one has to be seen” thing. I’d imagine she’s furious, albeit with the damage to their image rather than at anything he’s actually done.


----------



## killer b (Sep 14, 2021)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> By all accounts one thing Liz has been acutely aware of throughout her reign is the importance of PR and the public face of the royals.


she's done a shit job of keeping them in line in that case.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 14, 2021)

killer b said:


> she's done a shit job of keeping them in line in that case.


In terms of the bizarre internal log of liz-world, she must be deeply worried about the future of the monarchy after she's gone.  All those decades of 'duty' (yuk) gone up in smoke with the incoming self indulgence of charlie, along with this nonce.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 14, 2021)

Deadbeat parents who have never done a days work in their lives and live off state handouts


----------



## DaveCinzano (Sep 14, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> But said list will be useful to the defence team, who will be able to show that they tried pretty damn hard to serve HRH.


Probably more useful to the plaintiff than the defendant!


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 14, 2021)

Wilf said:


> In terms of the bizarre internal log of liz-world, she must be deeply worried about the future of the monarchy after she's gone.  All those decades of 'duty' (yuk) gone up in smoke with the incoming self indulgence of charlie, along with this nonce.


I really hope she lives to see it crumble before her eyes.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 14, 2021)

danny la rouge said:


> I really hope she lives to see it crumble before her eyes.


Turning to ashes in her mouth


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Sep 14, 2021)

killer b said:


> she's done a shit job of keeping them in line in that case.


I’d say given their still enduring popularity -seemingly in spite of her children’s recent best efforts - she’s overseen a remarkably good PR job over the last 70 years.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Sep 14, 2021)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> I’d say given their still enduring popularity -seemingly in spite of her children’s recent best efforts - she’s overseen a remarkably good PR job over the last 70 years.


It did go a bit wrong after Diana died though, she had to do a lot of work to get back in the good books.


----------



## killer b (Sep 14, 2021)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> I’d say given their still enduring popularity -seemingly in spite of her children’s recent best efforts - she’s overseen a remarkably good PR job over the last 70 years.


The British press do the job for her, she barely has to lift a finger.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Sep 14, 2021)

killer b said:


> The British press do the job for her, she barely has to lift a finger.


The press don’t do it on their own though. It’s all a two way process of favours and access, which she will have been very much part of over the years.


----------



## maomao (Sep 14, 2021)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> I’d say given their still enduring popularity -seemingly in spite of her children’s recent best efforts - she’s overseen a remarkably good PR job over the last 70 years.


It's been a tough struggle with only the entire British establishment and all the press supporting her.


----------



## killer b (Sep 14, 2021)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> The press don’t do it on their own though. It’s all a two way process of favours and access, which she will have been very much part of over the years.


Sure, but that's not exactly evidence of a brilliant PR mind at work is it? The press are totally dedicated to the preservation of her family's privileges, dropping them a few tidbits is basic self preservation. A tightly controlled PR operation would, for example, have stopped her husband being a massive open racist all those years. But they didn't, because they don't have a tightly controlled PR operation and they know the press will bat for them whatever.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Sep 14, 2021)

killer b said:


> Sure, but that's not exactly evidence of a brilliant PR mind at work is it? The press are totally dedicated to the preservation of her family's privileges, dropping them a few tidbits is basic self preservation. A tightly controlled PR operation would, for example, have stopped her husband being a massive open racist all those years. But they didn't, because they don't have a tightly controlled PR operation and they know the press will bat for them whatever.


Whether by accident or design I’d say her husbands gaffes over the years actually served them rather well.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 14, 2021)

DaveCinzano said:


> Probably more useful to the plaintiff than the defendant!


Dammit, my brain has been fucking up words all day.

What I meant was the list of who papers were attempted or served on would be useful to the Guiffre legal team.


----------



## killer b (Sep 14, 2021)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Whether by accident or design I’d say her husbands gaffes over the years actually served them rather well.


similar 'gaffes' by people who don't have the entire establishment batting for them have seen them hounded from public life. I wonder what the difference was?


----------



## 1927 (Sep 14, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The agreement thing, his lawyers haven’t even seen it, it is not public and they have requested a copy from the court. In the meantime them saying it absolves him from his crimes is speculation on their part, as baseless as their claim that her claim is baseless…


So an agreement they haven't seen absolves Andy from liability for things he never did in the first place? Hmm, that seems like a dangerous stance to take, as its almost an admission that he has done something to be absolved of responsibility for!


----------



## little_legs (Sep 14, 2021)

Wilf said:


> In terms of the bizarre internal log of liz-world, she must be deeply worried about the future of the monarchy after she's gone.  All those decades of 'duty' (yuk) gone up in smoke with the incoming self indulgence of charlie, along with this nonce.


it's a shame he is not the eldest, King Nonce would be the best chance of a republic


----------



## DaveCinzano (Sep 14, 2021)

little_legs said:


> it's a shame he is not the eldest, King Nonce would be the best chance of a republic


Still plenty of time for stuff about Louis' favourite mentee to surface


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 14, 2021)

killer b said:


> The British press do the job for her, she barely has to lift a finger.


people seem to like her for some reason as if she’s different from the others. don’t quite get it


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 14, 2021)

maomao said:


> It's been a tough struggle with only the entire British establishment and all the press supporting her.



She's down to her last 35 castles too, poor mare.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 14, 2021)

little_legs said:


> it's a shame he is not the eldest, King Nonce would be the best chance of a republic



If King Nazi didn't do for them, nothing will


----------



## Raheem (Sep 14, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> people seem to like her for some reason as if she’s different from the others. don’t quite get it


People don't like her for her, they like her because she receives constant praise for vague things like her dignity and poise, and never ever receives public criticism. So, people like her because who doesn't?


----------



## two sheds (Sep 14, 2021)

She also represents the majesty of Royalty. Someone I shared house with 30 years ago said he became a Royalist when he saw the Queen and Ronald Reagan share a podium together and saw the huge gulf between royalty and an elected leader. 

A muppet and Ronald Reagan would have had the same effect, mind.


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Sep 14, 2021)

steveseagull said:


> They want to remarry... if the nonce stuff goes away
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Hmmm... interesting. 

As his spouse, (again), she couldn't be called on to testify against him, could she?

There might be strategic legal reasons as to why remarrying might be a good idea.


----------



## krtek a houby (Sep 14, 2021)

The royals are evil scum but it's their supporters who help perpetuate their bloody reign. What's to be done about royalist enablers?


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 14, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> people seem to like her for some reason as if she’s different from the others. don’t quite get it


Given she’s 95, for the vast majority of people (nearly everyone?) she’s always been there and managed to conduct herself in ways acceptable to most for an unelected leader and hasn’t plumbed the depths of her progeny. 
More people than not accept this kind of ‘natural’ order and haven’t read Marx. Dunno, she’s liked though.


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 14, 2021)

i haven’t read Marx but can still see the obscenity of such people being in such a position of power and yet still being venerated for it


----------



## xenon (Sep 15, 2021)

Some people just like the retarded Toytown fairy tale Sherard that is the bulwark of the British class system. many more don’t see a plausible alternative so don’t get exercised about it.


----------



## xenon (Sep 15, 2021)

Most of the British public are Conservative, with a small C. The fucking dolts.


----------



## krtek a houby (Sep 15, 2021)

xenon said:


> Some people just like the retarded Toytown fairy tale Sherard that is the bulwark of the British class system. many more don’t see a plausible alternative so don’t get exercised about it.


"retarded"


----------



## xenon (Sep 15, 2021)

In the proper sense of the word for fuck‘s sake.


----------



## xenon (Sep 15, 2021)

as in having a royal family at the system that they represent, is a retardation on political and civic development. IMO.


----------



## BillRiver (Sep 15, 2021)

xenon said:


> In the proper sense of the word for fuck‘s sake.



What's that then?

And while we're at it, what is a Sherard?


----------



## xenon (Sep 15, 2021)

Retarding, retrograde, might have been better words to use, quite possibly.


----------



## xenon (Sep 15, 2021)

BillRiver said:


> What's that then?
> 
> And while we're at it, what is a Sherard?



see above. Something that is held back UK society. no idea, I meant cherade.


----------



## BillRiver (Sep 15, 2021)

xenon said:


> see above. Something that is held back UK society. no idea, I meant cherade.



What is a cherade?


----------



## fishfinger (Sep 15, 2021)

BillRiver said:


> What is a cherade?


He means charade.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 15, 2021)

fishfinger said:


> He mean charade.


The shard?


----------



## BillRiver (Sep 15, 2021)

My mind went to cheroots, for some reason.


----------



## Humberto (Sep 15, 2021)

He is disabled blind. So it's harder to present spelling perfection?


----------



## BillRiver (Sep 15, 2021)

Humberto said:


> He is disabled blind. So it's harder to present spelling perfection?



I did not know that.

Sorry xenon for mentioning the spelling/typing errors, I should not have done that.

Lesson learnt.

Thank you Humberto


----------



## xenon (Sep 15, 2021)

BillRiver said:


> I did not know that.
> 
> Sorry xenon for mentioning the spelling/typing errors, I should not have done that.
> 
> ...



no problem.
And apologies if I’ve offended anyone by using the word retarded. But yes, I did mean it in the sense of holding back development. Not describing it to people or individuals. Clumsy though I admit that, I’m a bit pissed. The UK public largely are fucking dults / dolts though, I’m not apologising for that...


----------



## krtek a houby (Sep 15, 2021)

xenon said:


> The UK public largely are fucking dults / dolts though, I’m not apologising for that...


 
Hmm


----------



## Wilf (Sep 15, 2021)

xenon said:


> The UK public largely are fucking dults / dolts though, I’m not apologising for that...


As a throwaway or drunken aside, fine. As a basis for any kind of social and political change, less so.


----------



## steveseagull (Sep 15, 2021)

The UK High court have agreed to serve papers on him. He is fucked









						High Court can 'proceed' with contacting Andrew over Virginia Giuffre's claims | ITV News
					

The High Court said Giuffre’s lawyers could proceed with the process of contacting the Duke of York about her civil action. | ITV National News




					www.itv.com


----------



## Wilf (Sep 15, 2021)

steveseagull said:


> The UK High court have agreed to serve papers on him. He is fucked
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Pretty extraordinary situation in itself to see the High Court siding against the 9th in line to the throne in a rape related case, even if it is about process. None of this gets him in a court or paying a penny in damages and my guess is that will remain the case (but we'll see). I do wonder though whether it emboldens the Met to do a proper investigation (aren't they 'reviewing' the criminal case?).  There comes a point where he get's dropped by the establishment and the chance of him getting interviewed under caution in a criminal case start to increase. The Met won't want a situation where prima facia evidence of rape and trafficking is aired in an American civil court whilst they are seen to be doing nothing.

Well, actually, I think that's exactly what _will _happen. UK plod review the case, talk to the CPS, maybe talk to windsor's solicitors and then... nothing.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Sep 15, 2021)

Wilf said:


> Well, actually, I think that's exactly what _will _happen. UK plod review the case, talk to the *CPS*, maybe talk to windsor's solicitors and then... nothing.


The clue's probably in the initialism.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 15, 2021)

Wilf said:


> Pretty extraordinary situation in itself to see the High Court siding against the 9th in line to the throne in a rape related case, even if it is about process. None of this gets him in a court or paying a penny in damages and my guess is that will remain the case (but we'll see). I do wonder though whether it emboldens the Met to do a proper investigation (aren't they 'reviewing' the criminal case?).  There comes a point where he get's dropped by the establishment and the chance of him getting interviewed under caution in a criminal case start to increase. The Met won't want a situation where prima facia evidence of rape and trafficking is aired in an American civil court whilst they are seen to be doing nothing.
> 
> Well, actually, I think that's exactly what _will _happen. UK plod review the case, talk to the CPS, maybe talk to windsor's solicitors and then... nothing.



We may see the poor man developing some debilitating - but easily faked -  health condition. This could result in him having to relocate to the Cayman Islands, with selfless nurse Sarah in tow, to quietly  retire from public life away from the baying media mob with their insolent accusations and questions.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 15, 2021)

BillRiver said:


> What is a cherade?


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 15, 2021)

steveseagull said:


> The UK High court have agreed to serve papers on him. He is fucked
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Trying to wriggle and sliver out of things on a technicality and now the High Court has had to step in.  Each day it gets worse for him, hilariously so.


----------



## weltweit (Sep 15, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> i haven’t read Marx but can still see the obscenity of such people being in such a position of power and yet still being venerated for it


What power does the Queen have though? sure she is wealthy enough to buy another racehorse but apart from being rich she only holds ceremonial power which is why she is tolerated.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Sep 15, 2021)

I'm in favour of quid pro quo, send us Anne Sacoolas, we send you Andrew.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Sep 15, 2021)

weltweit said:


> What power does the Queen have though? sure she is wealthy enough to buy another racehorse but apart from being rich she only holds ceremonial power which is why she is tolerated.


She doesn't just have ceremonial power, as was discovered quite recently and reported in the Guardian. Her power is hushed up.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Sep 15, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> I'm in favour of quid pro quo, send us Anne Sacoolas, we send you Andrew.


How is sex trafficking noncery even remotely comparable to a driving offence?


----------



## Zapp Brannigan (Sep 15, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> I'm in favour of quid pro quo, send us Anne Sacoolas, we send you Andrew.


How about instead of hanging the concept of justice for the victims and their families onto completely unrelated cases, we treat each case on its own merits and hand over his royal highnonce anyway?


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 15, 2021)

weltweit said:


> What power does the Queen have though? sure she is wealthy enough to buy another racehorse but apart from being rich she only holds ceremonial power which is why she is tolerated.


have you seen how much land she has? wealth is power


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 15, 2021)

trying to refute the claim on the basis of non delivery then having the HC step in to serve if needed. His lawyer surely did not propose this line, it must have been HRH nonce who demanded this. If not, his lawyer should be given the boot


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 15, 2021)

Is there an HRH Prince nonce entry in the 2021 death race yet ? It’s worth a punt


----------



## Sasaferrato (Sep 15, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> How is sex trafficking noncery even remotely comparable to a driving offence?



I hope when you become a magistrate, my case is heard by you. Killing someone through gross negligence is a wee bit more than a 'driving offence'.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 15, 2021)

weltweit said:


> What power does the Queen have though? sure she is wealthy enough to buy another racehorse but apart from being rich she only holds ceremonial power which is why she is tolerated.



Gough Whitman, Australian prime minister deposed by the Queen. A bit more than ceremonial…


----------



## maomao (Sep 15, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> I hope when you become a magistrate, my case is heard by you. Killing someone through gross negligence is a wee bit more than a 'driving offence'.


By normal sentencing standards for causing death by dangerous driving she'd be unlucky to get a two-year ban.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Sep 15, 2021)

not-bono-ever said:


> trying to refute the claim on the basis of non delivery then having the HC step in to serve if needed. His lawyer surely did not propose this line, it must have been HRH nonce who demanded this. If not, his lawyer should be given the boot



Even if the papers are served, this is a civil case. If he just ignores the whole thing, what can the US court do? 

Can they hold the case and award damages even if he doesn't go? (There is no way he is going to go.).


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 15, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> I hope when you become a magistrate, my case is heard by you. Killing someone through gross negligence is a wee bit more than a 'driving offence'.



There is death by careless driving and death by dangerous driving. That Yank would get a careless, doesn’t normally attract prison time, would certainly not should she ever find herself in a U.K. court.

Raping a child, that does normally see some porridge being dolled out.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Sep 15, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Gough Whitman, Australian prime minister deposed by the Queen. A bit more than ceremonial…



I very much doubt if the Queen took that decision off her own bat.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 15, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> Even if the papers are served, this is a civil case. If he just ignores the whole thing, what can the US court do?
> 
> Can they hold the case and award damages even if he doesn't go? (There is no way he is going to go.).



Award damages which become a debt and therefore enforceable via the U.K. High Court. US courts go in for punitive damages too, 100’s of millions…


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 15, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> I very much doubt if the Queen took that decision off her own bat.



It was her power that permitted it, no one else in a country 12,000 miles away could overturn the democratic mandate of the people.


----------



## killer b (Sep 15, 2021)

weltweit said:


> What power does the Queen have though? sure she is wealthy enough to buy another racehorse but apart from being rich she only holds ceremonial power which is why she is tolerated.


the graun have done a load of pieces on this recently, you should read some of them 





__





						Queen's consent investigations | UK news | The Guardian
					

<p>An investigation into the monarch's secret influence over legislation</p>




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Wilf (Sep 15, 2021)

maomao said:


> By normal sentencing standards for causing death by dangerous driving she'd be unlucky to get a two-year ban.


It's hard to know where this sits in her psyche now, but my guess is she'd have 'processed' it better if she had come back and faced the court. As you say, minimal chance of prison time. And _much more importantly_, the victims family might have had a bit of closure. 

Anyway, back to Prince Nonce.


----------



## A380 (Sep 15, 2021)

Looks like some judge here has got pissed off with the palace treating the law as a game...








						UK court to ensure sexual assault papers can be served on Prince Andrew
					

London's High Court said on Wednesday it would take steps if necessary to serve papers on Britain's Prince Andrew in a U.S. lawsuit brought by a woman who accuses him of sexually assaulting her two decades ago.




					www.reuters.com
				




So some bloke 18th century cosplay complete with wigs and stockings has put his foot down.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 15, 2021)

Can you not use words like 'retarded' please xenon.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 15, 2021)

not-bono-ever said:


> trying to refute the claim on the basis of non delivery then having the HC step in to serve if needed. His lawyer surely did not propose this line, it must have been HRH nonce who demanded this. If not, his lawyer should be given the boot


There's an existing agreement called (I think) the Hague Service Convention which allows papers to be served in reciprocal arrangements via courts. There's no way HRH would have stepped in to request papers were served by the High Court as that would be phenomenonally dimwitted,. it will be the other side that has utilised this mechanism.

Th BBC article on the topic has reported Guiffre's lawyers requested the High Court officially notify HRH of the civil US case.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 15, 2021)

Yep, recalled the HC earlier but am not up to date on the arrangements. Lolz


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 15, 2021)

not-bono-ever said:


> Yep, recalled the HC earlier but am not up to date on the arrangements. Lolz


Hague Service Convention (1965) different to the Hague Convention of which there are several.


----------



## AverageJoe (Sep 15, 2021)




----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 15, 2021)

weltweit said:


> What power does the Queen have though? sure she is wealthy enough to buy another racehorse but apart from being rich she only holds ceremonial power which is why she is tolerated.


Lol


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 15, 2021)

weltweit said:


> What power does the Queen have though? sure she is wealthy enough to buy another racehorse but apart from being rich she only holds ceremonial power which is why she is tolerated.


Did you forget that she's the head of State, head of the armed forces, head of the Church of England, and probably the biggest land owner in the country?
What power doesn't she have?


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 16, 2021)

And the whole spiel about the Royals 'not getting involved in politics' is a bit of bullshit that protects them. They very much DO get involved. It's just hidden from you.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 16, 2021)

The Prime Minister has scheduled weekly 'chats' with the Monarch. I expect they chat about the weather and horse racing.


----------



## 1927 (Sep 16, 2021)

Can’t see anything on BBC about the latest Developments.🤔


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 16, 2021)

1927 said:


> Can’t see anything on BBC about the latest Developments.🤔



It's yesterday's news, so has dropped off the home page, but the article is still on the site.









						Prince Andrew case: High Court to notify duke of US civil proceedings
					

Virginia Giuffre is suing the prince in New York over allegations of sexual assault.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 16, 2021)

1927 said:


> Can’t see anything on BBC about the latest Developments.🤔




It is there, but very well hidden, (had to search for it) Prince Andrew case: High Court to notify duke of US civil proceedings


edit: ah fuck you cupid_stunt 🤬


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 16, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> It is there, but very well hidden, (had to search for it) Prince Andrew case: High Court to notify duke of US civil proceedings
> 
> 
> edit: ah fuck you cupid_stunt 🤬


No, fuck the BBC for trying to hide it.


----------



## 1927 (Sep 16, 2021)

Its all starting to go rather wrong for Andy. I cant post as its behind a paywall, but Telegraph are reporting that the judge has refused to unseal the agreement  signed by Epstein that he was relying on to get him out of this!


----------



## DaveCinzano (Sep 16, 2021)

1927 said:


> Its all *starting* to go rather wrong for Andy


🤣😂🤣😂🤣


----------



## steveseagull (Sep 16, 2021)

Our lad is fucked. Well and truly fucked.





__





						Prince Andrew suffers setback in sex assault case as judge refuses to unseal document
					





					www.msn.com


----------



## steveseagull (Sep 16, 2021)

LOL

"The decision to keep it under wraps means the Duke will now have to engage with his own court process in order to request a copy. That would mean accepting that he has been served the lawsuit and then being exposed to a potentially damaging discovery process."


----------



## steveseagull (Sep 16, 2021)

"

Alan Dershowitz steps in​Alan Dershowitz, a former lawyer for sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, had asked a judge to give the Duke’s lawyers a copy of the confidential settlement, believing it will allow them to get the case dropped.


Whenever anything noncey is afoot, Dershowitz always seems to be on the scene


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 16, 2021)

steveseagull said:


> "
> 
> Alan Dershowitz steps in​Alan Dershowitz, a former lawyer for sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, had asked a judge to give the Duke’s lawyers a copy of the confidential settlement, believing it will allow them to get the case dropped.
> 
> ...


“It got me off, after all”.


----------



## steveseagull (Sep 16, 2021)

Dramatic shift of move = he has just realised he has fucked up massively, probably down to his own self entitlement


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 16, 2021)




----------



## Ming (Sep 16, 2021)

steveseagull said:


> Dramatic shift of move = he has just realised he has fucked up massively, probably down to his own self entitlement



Wonder if he’s sweating now?


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 17, 2021)

danny la rouge said:


> View attachment 288696


They could have at least tried to match the typeface. It’s compressed something or other, I’d give the answer if I could be arsed spending another five mins or so.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 17, 2021)

Ming said:


> Wonder if he’s sweating now?


To be fair, given that fight or flight is no longer working, his misfiring adrenal system forces him to hide in his mum's castle.  You can't argue with biology.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 17, 2021)

danny la rouge said:


> View attachment 288696


He looks like he's got one of those lego heads.


----------



## Ming (Sep 17, 2021)

Wilf said:


> To be fair, given that fight or flight is no longer working, his misfiring adrenal system forces him to hide in his mum's castle.  You can't argue with biology.


Tough to argue with the US legal system also.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 17, 2021)

I think we can all agree this case isn't going away anytime soon, no matter which castle of mummy's he hides in.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Sep 17, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> I think we can all agree this case isn't going away anytime soon, no matter which castle of mummy's he hides in.


It seems he may be party to the deal that Paedstein signed, which might result in the case going away very soon.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 17, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> It seems he may be party to the deal that Paedstein signed, which might result in the case going away very soon.


If he has wriggle room the damage is already done. The public are very much of the ‘if you’ve got nothing to hide’ mentality and don’t like nonces. Albeit some are boot lickers that won’t accept any hint of guilt.


----------



## dessiato (Sep 17, 2021)

Bet he is sweating now.


----------



## Raheem (Sep 17, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> It seems he may be party to the deal that Paedstein signed, which might result in the case going away very soon.


I'd be close to 100% certain that it's not possible for him to be a party to the agreement, because it's an agreement made in court in a case he wasn't involved in.

Think it is more likely that VG agreed not to sue a category of persons along the lines of "Jeffrey Epstein Ghislaine Maxwell, his her companies, agents, pets and bingo friends", and the lawyers want to argue that Andrew is somehow covered by this.

Think it's also likely they don't expect it to fly, but want to cause a delay and add to the costs (because the greater the costs become, the riskier it is for VG not to settle).

(Edited post because the agreement was with Maxwell, rather than Epstein, apparently.)


----------



## krtek a houby (Sep 17, 2021)

Wilf said:


> He looks like he's got one of those lego heads.


It should be let go


----------



## kenny g (Sep 17, 2021)

Prostitution and Exploitation of Prostitution | The Crown Prosecution Service 

Has a few possible offences. The use of an exploited person for sexual purposes offence is strict liability so the nonce would be guilty whether or not he knew the one providing the service was exploited. However it appears to have been introduced after the alleged "meeting". Ms Maxwell could potentially fall into some other offences though..


----------



## danski (Sep 17, 2021)

Raheem said:


> Think it's also likely they don't expect it to fly, but want to cause a delay and add to the costs (because the greater the costs become, the riskier it is for VG not to settle).


I would happily contribute to crowd fund or some such for her legal fees. Having one set up would hopefully send a certain message to the monarchy.


----------



## 1927 (Sep 17, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> It seems he may be party to the deal that Paedstein signed, which might result in the case going away very soon.


Keep up. the whole point of the latest developments is that the judge is refusing to unseal that agreement so he cant have a copy, so he is going to have to enter into the court process.


----------



## Athos (Sep 17, 2021)

kenny g said:


> Prostitution and Exploitation of Prostitution | The Crown Prosecution Service
> 
> Has a few possible offences. The use of an exploited person for sexual purposes offence is strict liability so the nonce would be guilty whether or not he knew the one providing the service was exploited. However it appears to have been introduced after the alleged "meeting". Ms Maxwell could potentially fall into some other offences though..


Sadly, those offences all post-date the events in question.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 17, 2021)

kenny g said:


> Prostitution and Exploitation of Prostitution | The Crown Prosecution Service
> 
> Has a few possible offences. The use of an exploited person for sexual purposes offence is strict liability so the nonce would be guilty whether or not he knew the one providing the service was exploited. However it appears to have been introduced after the alleged "meeting". Ms Maxwell could potentially fall into some other offences though..



He allegedly raped her in 2001, so before those prostitution laws came in to play. Rape on the other hand was very much a thing in 2001…


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 17, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Yeah, outfits like Matrix Churchill could quite rightly say no, but he was represented in court yesterday (video conference) by some LA attorney, surely the judge could just dump the papers on him and move on?



Seems the judge has listened to me and stated the papers can be served to the LA lawyer with the big hair.

Game on.


----------



## dessiato (Sep 17, 2021)

Now it's getting really interesting. Let's see HWCS wriggle now. Bet it'll be more than the worms I put on my fishing hook.


----------



## Athos (Sep 17, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> He allegedly raped her in 2001, so before those prostitution laws came in to play. Rape on the other hand was very much a thing in 2001…



The chances of proving beyond reasonable doubt that she did not consent, and that he knew that, are, sadly, vanishingly small. The best chances of holding him to account are civil proceedings and 'the court of public opinion.'


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 17, 2021)

Raheem said:


> I'd be close to 100% certain that it's not possible for him to be a party to the agreement, because it's an agreement made in court in a case he wasn't involved in.



You'd think wouldn't you? But then Epstein did manage to make a deal to accept a token conviction in exchange for immunity for any and all nameless co-conspirators. Although that deal was thrown out in the end, it wasn't thrown out because of the insanity of giving blanket immunity but because of a procedural error.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 17, 2021)




----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 17, 2021)

Pig scum : breach of the peace fine


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 17, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Seems the judge has listened to me and stated the papers can be served to the LA lawyer with the big hair.
> 
> Game on.


Yeh, you know the time to act is now


----------



## Wilf (Sep 17, 2021)

Mirror suggesting he's staying in Scotland to avoid getting the papers served:








						Prince Andrew could delay sex abuse lawsuit legal papers by staying in Scotland
					

Prince Andrew could delay being served with sex assault lawsuit papers filed by alleged rape victim Virginia Giuffre as he is staying in Balmoral, Scotland, as the High Court of England & Wales has no jurisdiction there




					www.mirror.co.uk
				




Must admit, there's no evidence he's specifically hiding in Scotland as opposed to hiding in one of the other castles (to avoid the papers). Seems like a bit of journalistic guesswork. Same time, every bit of the story pushes the windsors further into unexpected territory: accused of rape... does an interview on TV about whether he raped a trafficked woman... legal proceedings start... tried to avoid receiving the papers. Fuck him, the nonce.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 17, 2021)

Thought that might be behind his flit to mummy's castle. But the NYC judge has stated that the papers can be served on his LA lawyer so it's all systems go for the slimy paedo.


----------



## dessiato (Sep 17, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Thought that might be behind his flit to mummy's castle. But the NYC judge has stated that the papers can be served on his LA lawyer so it's all systems go for the slimy paedo.


Let's not call him a slimy paedo. It's insulting to things like slugs, hagfish, and other slimy critters.


----------



## eatmorecheese (Sep 17, 2021)

Gonna make you sweat
Baby
Let the lawyers take control
Let the papers move you


----------



## T & P (Sep 17, 2021)

danny la rouge said:


> View attachment 288696



In its daily recap of the morning front pages, the BBC website appears to have forgotten to show the Mirror's today. 

I'm sure it's just an oversight.









						Newspaper headlines: Double-jabbed 'holiday joy' and defence pact challenged
					

Changes to travel test rules and the fallout from the UK's submarine pact are among the front-page stories.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 17, 2021)

T & P said:


> In its daily recap of the morning front pages, the BBC website appears to have forgotten to show the Mirror's today.
> 
> I'm sure it's just an oversight.
> 
> ...


As the charming typeface mismatch makes clear, that is not the real Mirror front page but rather a humorously altered version of it.


----------



## T & P (Sep 17, 2021)

danny la rouge said:


> As the charming typeface mismatch makes clear, that is not the real Mirror front page but rather a humorously altered version of it.


Sorry, I had meant to quote steveseagull 's post not yours, as he had posted the real Mirror front page for today, which is still missing from the BBC Paper Review page.


----------



## MysteryGuest (Sep 17, 2021)

T & P said:


> In its daily recap of the morning front pages, the BBC website appears to have forgotten to show the Mirror's today.
> 
> I'm sure it's just an oversight.
> 
> ...


It's so that people don't lose trust in the monarchy


----------



## scalyboy (Sep 17, 2021)

dessiato said:


> Let's not call him a slimy paedo. It's insulting to things like slugs, hagfish, and other slimy critters.


Fair point. How about calling him The Sweaty Nonce or His Royal Nonceness instead?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 17, 2021)

scalyboy said:


> Fair point. How about calling him The Sweaty Nonce or His Royal Nonceness instead?


Penguin food


----------



## scalyboy (Sep 17, 2021)

In my mind I can hear an aged gillie singing the traditional Scottish ballad “Awa wi ye, yon sweaty nonce”


----------



## scalyboy (Sep 17, 2021)

“An ye’ll be penguin food in the morning”


----------



## Zapp Brannigan (Sep 17, 2021)

scalyboy said:


> Fair point. How about calling him The Sweaty Nonce or His Royal Nonceness instead?


I'm already claiming His Royal Highnonce as the official moniker.


----------



## Serge Forward (Sep 17, 2021)

His Royal Nonceness, Nonce Andrew is his full title


----------



## scalyboy (Sep 17, 2021)

Serge Forward said:


> His Royal Nonceness, Nonce Andrew is his full title


The Grand Old Nonce of York


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 17, 2021)

scalyboy said:


> The Grand Old Nonce of York


He had 10,000 men,
He also had some underage girls
But he can’t remember them.


----------



## magneze (Sep 17, 2021)

And when he was up he was up
And when he was down he was down
And when he was only halfway up
He decided to go back down again before he broke a sweat 😓


----------



## Wilf (Sep 17, 2021)

scalyboy said:


> The Grand Old Nonce of York


Paedipus Rex.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 19, 2021)

Judging by what is coming out from her lawyers, that Prince Savile-Fritzl-Len-Fairclough-Cyril-Smith really has been avoiding all the normal serving papers protocols









						Post, courier, e-mail - the saga to serve papers on Prince Andrew
					

What is the latest in Virginia Giuffre's attempt to sue Prince Andrew and will the case ever begin?



					www.bbc.co.uk
				




It also seems that her lawyers are more than happy to allow the press to feast upon this performance. Yank lawyers are bastards to screw about with. He will settle befoe this goes to court surely


----------



## Wilf (Sep 19, 2021)

not-bono-ever said:


> Judging by what is coming out from her lawyers, that Prince Savile-Fritzl-Len-Fairclough-Cyril-Smith really has been avoiding all the normal serving papers protocols
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'd have thought that increases his risk of a criminal prosecution. I know there's no necessary link between a pay off and a criminal prosecutions (Ronaldo say), but it certainly wouldn't help his case.  His options are narrowing, but I'd have thought his only strategy has to be to use every device possible to disrupt the New York case, including appealing if he loses. His strongest defence is probably the complex set of jurisdiction issues.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 21, 2021)

Having drawn Windsor into engaging a US attorney to represent him, the victim’s lawyers have now served the papers to them.









						Prince Andrew’s US attorney served with sexual assault lawsuit, Virginia Giuffre’s lawyers claim
					

Papers delivered to office of royal’s lawyer in Los Angeles after his legal team contested first serving of proceedings on 10 September




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 21, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Having drawn Windsor into engaging a US attorney to represent him, the victim’s lawyers have now served the papers to them.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


hurrah!!


----------



## Wilf (Sep 21, 2021)

'No, not listening, not had any papers, na na na naa!'
- So, you're acting for the prince are you?
'Yes, we do have that honour...'
- Great, well, here's the fucking papers.
'Doh!'


----------



## Zapp Brannigan (Sep 21, 2021)

He's been so easily manipulated into having the papers served that the only plausible explanation is his various lawyers are giving proper instruction, only to be ignored by some quite mind-blowing arrogance and entitlement from The Defendant.  There's no way the lawyers can be this shit, surely?


----------



## Tankus (Sep 21, 2021)

Release the Kraken
 He should get Alan Dershowitz to represent  him

Oh wait, he cant
​


----------



## prunus (Sep 21, 2021)

Zapp Brannigan said:


> He's been so easily manipulated into having the papers served that the only plausible explanation is his various lawyers are giving proper instruction, only to be ignored by some quite mind-blowing arrogance and entitlement from The Defendant.  There's no way the lawyers can be this shit, surely?



I refer you to exhibit "Rudy Giuliani".


----------



## Raheem (Sep 21, 2021)

prunus said:


> I refer you to exhibit "Rudy Giuliani".


Not a crap lawyer. A mediocre but audacious con artist with an easy target.


----------



## prunus (Sep 21, 2021)

Raheem said:


> Not a crap lawyer. A mediocre but audacious con artist with an easy target.


Pretty bad lawyer too I think...  Well, I'm not retaining him anyway.


----------



## Raheem (Sep 21, 2021)

prunus said:


> Pretty bad lawyer too I think...  Well, I'm not retaining him anyway.


Not really a lawyer at all was what I was getting at. He didn't provide Trump with legal advice, he took advantage of him and sold him horseshit.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 21, 2021)

You've got to admit Rudy is relaxed about who he is, happy in his own skin. For example, if he was in a hotel room with a substantially younger woman, he'd still be willing to 'make himself more comfortable' on the bed.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 21, 2021)

Wilf said:


> You've got to admit Rudy is relaxed about who he is, happy in his own skin.



But, having seen him decomposing melting in public, is it actually his own real skin?


----------



## neonwilderness (Sep 22, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> I think we can all agree this case isn't going away anytime soon, no matter which castle of mummy's he hides in.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Sep 22, 2021)

I'm not sure why but Bill Gates appears to have hired the Windsor Nonce's PR firm, judging by his performance here


----------



## killer b (Sep 22, 2021)

What the fuck.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Sep 22, 2021)

"Well, he's dead, so, ah....."

Smooth, Bill, real smooth


----------



## killer b (Sep 22, 2021)

Maybe he's trolling all those people who've spent the last couple of years shrieking that he's a member of a murderous paedo gang


----------



## DaveCinzano (Sep 22, 2021)

killer b said:


> Maybe he's trolling all those people who've spent the last couple of years shrieking that he's a member of a murderous paedo gang


Triple bluff


----------



## two sheds (Sep 23, 2021)

Not sweating though from what I could see  did he mention pizzas?


----------



## Throbbing Angel (Sep 23, 2021)

He doesn't even know what a Pizza Express is!


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 23, 2021)




----------



## Raheem (Sep 23, 2021)

TBF, it's pretty clear that the pizzas in that photo are props that no-one is going to eat.


----------



## Raheem (Sep 23, 2021)

Trying to work out why the clips feel so incriminating, even though, on the face of it, he doesn't give anything away. Think it might be the repeated use of "It's nothing new". You don't need a go-to phrase like that if you've nothing to hide.


----------



## clicker (Sep 23, 2021)

I couldn't work out at all, what it was, he was trying to say or not say.
What a strange answer.


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Sep 23, 2021)

Raheem said:


> Trying to work out why the clips feel so incriminating, even though, on the face of it, he doesn't give anything away. Think it might be the repeated use of "It's nothing new". You don't need a go-to phrase like that if you've nothing to hide.


I suspect that will just be a line he's been fed by a PR/crisis management person, or even a legal adviser, to say as a stock response to shut the conversation down. Someone in his position and of his means will probably have hired someone to advise and may even have rehearsed potential questions and answers. 

I don't think it's necessarily indicative of anything other than that really, ie he's been advised not to elaborate further, because it's so repetitive it sounds very scripted, to my ears, rather than him being cagey or evasive.


----------



## MrCurry (Sep 23, 2021)

Raheem said:


> I'd be close to 100% certain that it's not possible for him to be a party to the agreement, because it's an agreement made in court in a case he wasn't involved in.


I’d be close to 100% certain he knows exactly what is written in that agreement, as the settlement was likely financed by him, in the hope it would prevent what’s currently happening to him.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 23, 2021)

His continued meeting with Epstein was cited as a significant reason his wife wished to divorce him. So there’s clearly more than ‘nothing new’…


----------



## bluescreen (Sep 23, 2021)

"There's nothing new on that." And he pulls this face:





which is nothing like:


----------



## krtek a houby (Sep 23, 2021)

Wait, so all those right wing conspiracy theories about Bill, Hilary, deep cover pizzagate rings are some kind of Chinese whispers?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Sep 23, 2021)

danny la rouge said:


> View attachment 289765


More into diddy little pizza rolls than adult-sized pies, according to Mark Rober


----------



## Wilf (Sep 23, 2021)

Raheem said:


> TBF, it's pretty clear that the pizzas in that photo are props that no-one is going to eat.


I wouldn't touch it, highly efficient microchip delivery mechanism.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 23, 2021)

clicker said:


> I couldn't work out at all, what it was, he was trying to say or not say.
> What a strange answer.


'It was just a shooting party'.


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 23, 2021)

The only thing I got from that video was that he wasn't happy about being asked that someone he knew had turned out to be a child sex offender which is fair enough.  I wouldn't be happy being asked about it either especially if I had no idea they were. 
I'd certainly be wondering why I had failed to pick up on it, could I have spotted something? could I have done something?. Plus the fact it's the sort of crime where people are automatically considered guilty by association especially when you're someone who already plays a central role in other people's crackpot theories.
I've no idea why he and his wife are getting divorced, perhaps she does suspect him of noncieness, perhaps he's been cheating on her, perhaps they're just sick of the sight of each other, it happens. 
But saying that rather embarassing video is incriminating is more conspiracy theory nonsense.


----------



## killer b (Sep 23, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> The only thing I got from that video was that he wasn't happy about being asked that someone he knew had turned out to be a child sex offender which is fair enough. I wouldn't be happy being asked about it either especially if I had no idea they were.


but he met and hung out with him after he was convicted of child sex offences, that was the question he was asked in the clip?


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 23, 2021)

Her actual words were "It was reported at that time you had a number of meetings with Jeffery Epstein who when you met him 10 years ago had been convicted of soliciting sex from minors", the clip starts mid-question so she may have said something more. What sort of meetings? In a lawyer's office in New York, In a pub for a few beers with a mate, On Epstein's island surrounded by underage girls in bikinis?. If the first he might very well have not known about Epsteins crimes, if it's the last then he should be wearing an orange jumpsuit. There's way too much reading between the lines going on here and a desire to convict Gates by association.
Epstein was a rich, powerful and important man and a lot of people will have met him who no doubt regret it. The only thing that video proves is that Gates give shit interviews like He Who Cannot Sweat.  The thing with His Royal Noncieness is that there is plenty of other things that undermine his claims


----------



## bluescreen (Sep 23, 2021)

He could hardly not have known about Epstein's conviction, yet he continued to hang out with him. Of course the question is embarrassing.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 23, 2021)

__





						Explained: the links between Bill Gates and Jeffrey Epstein | The Week UK
					

Microsoft founder ‘stammers’ when questioned about relationship with billionaire paedophile



					www.theweek.co.uk
				






> The relationship between Bill and Epstein is widely considered to have been a factor in the divorce of Bill and Melinda Gates. A source close to the pair told People Magazine that “Epstein is definitely a sore spot” for Melinda.
> 
> Fateful meetings​Announcing their divorce, the couple gave no explanation for their separation beyond a joint statement shared on Twitter that said “we no longer believe we can grow together as a couple in this next phase of our lives”. But a former employee of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation told The Wall Street Journal that Melinda’s “concerns about the relationship” between her husband and Epstein “date as far back as 2013”.


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 23, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I can't say that I'm happy finding myself defending Bill Gates but that article is full of 'according to a former employee' and 'according to a source', it might be rock solid or it might be just speculation. It's not a statement by the NYPD or the FBI.
Has Gates been investigated by either of them? The main reason that Epstein finally got his just deserts was that (despite efforts by his rich mates to brush it under the carpet) was that there were a few FBI agents and DA's that just wouldn't let it rest.
Again putting myself in his shoes, Mrs Q wouldn't be happy that someone I knew was/might be a kiddy fiddler. The difference between us is that I would probably listen to my wife. At worst that aticle proves that Gates didn't listen to his but that is still a long way from being proved a kiddie fiddler because he knew a kiddie fiddler. Perhaps he is but but most of the basis for any accusations is he knew one and was daft enough to not immediately drop any contact with Epstein as soon as he found out. Perhaps he believed Epsteins claims that was all a misunderstanding, I suspect a lot of people did that. It's easier to believe people you know personally rather than news reports by people you don't, that way you don't have to face up to the fact you were wrong about someone.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 23, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> I can't say that I'm happy finding myself defending Bill Gates but that article is full of 'according to a former employee' and 'according to a source', it might be rock solid or it might be just speculation. It's not a statement by the NYPD or the FBI.
> Has Gates been investigated by either of them? The main reason that Epstein finally got his just deserts was that (despite efforts by his rich mates to brush it under the carpet) was that there were a few FBI agents and DA's that just wouldn't let it rest.
> Again putting myself in his shoes, Mrs Q wouldn't be happy that someone I knew was/might be a kiddy fiddler. The difference between us is that I would probably listen to my wife. At worst that aticle proves that Gates didn't listen to his but that is still a long way from being proved a kiddie fiddler because he knew a kiddie fiddler. Perhaps he is but but most of the basis for any accusations is he knew one and was daft enough to not immediately drop any contact with Epstein as soon as he found out. Perhaps he believed Epsteins claims that was all a misunderstanding, I suspect a lot of people did that. It's easier to believe people you know personally rather than news reports by people you don't, that way you don't have to face up to the fact you were wrong about someone.


I don't know if anyone has suggested he is himself a nonce?  But he's someone who seems to have built his entire friendship/dealings with epstein in the period _after _his first conviction.  Seems to be someone who thinks billionaires move in whatever circles they want, regardless of common decency.  

Sounds like a lot of stuff will come out about gates when he dies.  Hearsay of course, from the article and again there's no indication of noncery afaik.  But, well, fuck him.


----------



## andysays (Sep 23, 2021)

MrCurry said:


> I’d be close to 100% certain he knows exactly what is written in that agreement, as the settlement was likely financed by him, in the hope it would prevent what’s currently happening to him.


I'm a bit confused by this, as the thread is now talking about Bill Gates as well as the DoY.

Are you actually suggesting that one of them was involved in financing Epstein's deal with Guiffre?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 23, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> I can't say that I'm happy finding myself defending Bill Gates but that article is full of 'according to a former employee' and 'according to a source', it might be rock solid or it might be just speculation. It's not a statement by the NYPD or the FBI.
> Has Gates been investigated by either of them? The main reason that Epstein finally got his just deserts was that (despite efforts by his rich mates to brush it under the carpet) was that there were a few FBI agents and DA's that just wouldn't let it rest.
> Again putting myself in his shoes, Mrs Q wouldn't be happy that someone I knew was/might be a kiddy fiddler. The difference between us is that I would probably listen to my wife. At worst that aticle proves that Gates didn't listen to his but that is still a long way from being proved a kiddie fiddler because he knew a kiddie fiddler. Perhaps he is but but most of the basis for any accusations is he knew one and was daft enough to not immediately drop any contact with Epstein as soon as he found out. Perhaps he believed Epsteins claims that was all a misunderstanding, I suspect a lot of people did that. It's easier to believe people you know personally rather than news reports by people you don't, that way you don't have to face up to the fact you were wrong about someone.




No one has suggested that Gates is a nonce, rather that his friendship with Epstein was a factor in Melinda wishing to split, which does seem to be confirmed by many named sources.


----------



## maomao (Sep 23, 2021)

Gates is known for womanising, chasing female staff and journalists, and for holding 'naked pool parties' with paid strippers in the early days of Microsoft. He then hung out with a convicted people trafficker after the conviction that everybody knew about. Personally, I'd be surprised if he hadn't joined in at some level.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 23, 2021)

maomao said:


> Gates is known for womanising, chasing female staff and journalists, and for holding 'naked pool parties' with paid strippers in the early days of Microsoft. He then hung out with a convicted people trafficker after the conviction that everybody knew about. Personally, I'd be surprised if he hadn't joined in at some level.


If he was a leader in such things at Microsoft then I see no reason to conclude he simply joined in as a participant rather than being an organiser


----------



## weltweit (Sep 23, 2021)

Wilf said:


> 'It was just a shooting party'.


TBF ha didn't say that exactly.. he said something like "it was just an ordinary shooting party"


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 23, 2021)

weltweit said:


> TBF ha didn't say that exactly.. he said something like "it was just an ordinary shooting party"




“Just a straightforward, a straightforward shooting weekend.”


----------



## weltweit (Sep 23, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> “Just a straightforward, a straightforward shooting weekend.”


Yep that is more like it, implying it was as straightforward as everyone else's shooting weekends are


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 23, 2021)

Charles was pretty close with Savile back in the day also. “Before anyone knew”. A bit of a weird pattern though. Either prolific nonces are somehow attracted to Royals or some other explanation.

Have a creepy photo:


----------



## weltweit (Sep 23, 2021)

Savile looks like the cat that had the cheese! sicko


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 23, 2021)

weltweit said:


> Savile looks like the cat that had the cheese! sicko


He allegedly became an advisor to Charles and Diana during their separation. Whilst raping kids in hospitals and children’s homes. MI5 must have known. The mind boggles.


----------



## weltweit (Sep 23, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> He allegedly became an advisor to Charles and Diana during their separation. Whilst raping kids in hospitals and children’s homes. MI5 must have known. The mind boggles.


You say Mi5 must have known, must they? how so?


----------



## weltweit (Sep 23, 2021)

I like Bill Gates, I like that he is giving his wealth back even if he isn't doing it fast enough, but I think there is something to his friendship with Epstein and I expect it was a consideration in his divorce. Interesting that Trump seen in pictures with Epstein nearly always has his arm around Melania, I wonder how old she was at the time? Anyhow any rich male who was friends with Epstein has to be suspicious.


----------



## mx wcfc (Sep 23, 2021)

weltweit said:


> I like Bill Gates, I like that he is giving his wealth back


Where did his wealth come from in the first place?  Maybe if he had charged customers less, paid his employees more and paid his fucking tax, he wouldn't need to be so "philanthropic".


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 23, 2021)

weltweit said:


> You say Mi5 must have known, must they? how so?


Because Charles is 1st in line to the throne and his mother is head of state, he will become head of state and it’s their job to protect the state?


----------



## weltweit (Sep 23, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Because Charles is 1st in line to the throne and his mother is head of state, he will become head of state and it’s their job to protect the state?


Surely if they knew of Savile's crimes they would have told Charles, and Charles would have ... well what? Stopped seeing him perhaps, allowed a prosecution?


----------



## Elpenor (Sep 23, 2021)




----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 23, 2021)

weltweit said:


> Surely if they knew of Savile's crimes they would have told Charles, and Charles would have ... well what? Stopped seeing him perhaps, allowed a prosecution?


Or perhaps friends of the Royals become untouchable by association. If you think MI5 don’t take a keen interest in anyone closely related to power then I’m not sure what you imagine their purpose is. They’re the most protected people in the country.


----------



## weltweit (Sep 23, 2021)

mx wcfc said:


> Where did his wealth come from in the first place?  Maybe if he had charged customers less, paid his employees more and paid his fucking tax, he wouldn't need to be so "philanthropic".


Gates and his colleagues were playing the game of business, a game at which they proved to be very successful. I think I recall quite a lot of senior executives at Microsoft also did very well. In the end it seems it must have become at least a bit hollow, hence what he is doing now.  It won't be his business prowess or philanthropy that might bring him down, but his time with Epstein could well do.


----------



## discokermit (Sep 23, 2021)

weltweit said:


> Surely if they knew of Savile's crimes they would have told Charles, and Charles would have ... well what? Stopped seeing him perhaps, allowed a prosecution?


are you only now realising these are all very bad people?


----------



## weltweit (Sep 23, 2021)

discokermit said:


> are you only now realising these are all very bad people?


Not at all.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 23, 2021)

weltweit said:


> Not at all.


You’re like my mother. So wedded to the PR of hierarchy that noncery is simply untrue. People of wealth and social standing don’t do things like that. Ignoring their terrible histories somehow.


----------



## maomao (Sep 23, 2021)

weltweit said:


> Surely if they knew of Savile's crimes they would have told Charles, and Charles would have ... well what? Stopped seeing him perhaps, allowed a prosecution?


More like gone with him to Stoke Mandeville to hump some corpses.


----------



## MrCurry (Sep 24, 2021)

andysays said:


> I'm a bit confused by this, as the thread is now talking about Bill Gates as well as the DoY.
> 
> Are you actually suggesting that one of them was involved in financing Epstein's deal with Guiffre?


The comment I referred to was talking about Andrew.  I’m speculating that if the deal binds her to not pursue “anyone else” in connection with the events, then maybe Andy chipped into the kitty which paid her off.  It could even have been what he was chatting to Epstein about in the park, when they got papped.

But it’s just idle speculation based on nothing at all.


----------



## andysays (Sep 24, 2021)

MrCurry said:


> The comment I referred to was talking about Andrew.  I’m speculating that if the deal binds her to not pursue “anyone else” in connection with the events, then maybe Andy chipped into the kitty which paid her off.  It could even have been what he was chatting to Epstein about in the park, when they got papped.
> 
> But it’s just idle speculation based on nothing at all.


Thanks for clarifying.

Idle speculation is our meat and drink here, so as long as it's clear that's what it is, I don't think anyone can object.


----------



## 1927 (Sep 24, 2021)

MrCurry said:


> The comment I referred to was talking about Andrew.  I’m speculating that if the deal binds her to not pursue “anyone else” in connection with the events, then maybe Andy chipped into the kitty which paid her off.  It could even have been what he was chatting to Epstein about in the park, when they got papped.
> 
> But it’s just idle speculation based on nothing at all.


Interesting piece I saw last night with her lawyer being questioned about this. He couldn’t go into detail about the deal, as it’s confidential, but he basically said that to be party to the agreement Noncey Bollocks would have to admit that he was a co-conspirator, and therefore admit guilt. So can’t see that happening as it would obviously open up the possibility of criminal charges being filed!


----------



## andysays (Sep 24, 2021)

1927 said:


> Interesting piece I saw last night with her lawyer being questioned about this. He couldn’t go into detail about the deal, as it’s confidential, but he basically said that to be party to the agreement Noncey Bollocks would have to admit that he was a co-conspirator, and therefore admit guilt. So can’t see that happening as it would obviously open up the possibility of criminal charges being filed!


TBH, pretty much everything else he has done has at least strongly suggested his guilt, so I won't even put that past him.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 24, 2021)

1927 said:


> Interesting piece I saw last night with her lawyer being questioned about this. He couldn’t go into detail about the deal, as it’s confidential, but he basically said that to be party to the agreement Noncey Bollocks would have to admit that he was a co-conspirator, and therefore admit guilt. So can’t see that happening as it would obviously open up the possibility of criminal charges being filed!


I didn't see the piece, but it sounds unlikely to me, precisely because that would be the risk.  In passing it would also blow away the stance he took in the Maitliss interview (don't know her, never met her).  Same time, everything he's said and throughout has narrowed his options further and further.  

I think his main problem is, well, he's guilty as fucking sin.


----------



## 1927 (Sep 24, 2021)

Wilf said:


> I didn't see the piece, but it sounds unlikely to me, precisely because that would be the risk.  In passing it would also blow away the stance he took in the Maitliss interview (don't know her, never met her).  Same time, everything he's said and throughout has narrowed his options further and further.
> 
> I think his main problem is, well, he's guilty as fucking sin.


That"s a really good point that i hadn't considered before, and maybe others hadn't either. If he's never met her why would he think it likely that he was covered by an agreement signed by the dead paedo? he's backed himself into a corner here big time!


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 24, 2021)

weltweit said:


> I like Bill Gates, I like that he is giving his wealth back even if he isn't doing it fast enough, but I think there is something to his friendship with Epstein and I expect it was a consideration in his divorce. Interesting that Trump seen in pictures with Epstein nearly always has his arm around Melania, I wonder how old she was at the time? Anyhow any rich male who was friends with Epstein has to be suspicious.


So how can you still like someone who thinks it's ok to hang out with Trump, one of the most horrific men to exist on this planet, and Jeffrey Epstein, who sex trafficked underage girls?


----------



## brogdale (Sep 24, 2021)

Windsor has finally accepted the inevitable...


----------



## weltweit (Sep 24, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> So how can you still like someone who thinks it's ok to hang out with Trump, one of the most horrific men to exist on this planet, and Jeffrey Epstein, who sex trafficked underage girls?


I liked Gates before I knew anything about these things, because of how successful he was in business. The other aspects are indeed dislikeable and if he gets into trouble for them on his own head be it.


----------



## Sue (Sep 24, 2021)

weltweit said:


> *I liked Gates before I knew anything about these things, because of how successful he was in business*. The other aspects are indeed dislikeable and if he gets into trouble for them on his own head be it.


That's a reason for liking someone?


----------



## two sheds (Sep 24, 2021)

I liked him because his software was so fucking expensive and you never actually got to own it


----------



## weltweit (Sep 24, 2021)

Sue said:


> That's a reason for liking someone?


Sure, why not?


----------



## Raheem (Sep 24, 2021)

"It looks like you're trying to justify liking Bill Gates. Do you want help with that?"


----------



## spanglechick (Sep 24, 2021)

weltweit said:


> Sure, why not?


Umm. Capitalism?


----------



## T & P (Sep 24, 2021)

But what about that attention-seeking Meghan Markle, eh?


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 25, 2021)

Well tbf, she’s very much playing the capitalist game also, albeit only known connection to nonces through marriage.


----------



## kabbes (Sep 25, 2021)

weltweit said:


> Sure, why not?


Why _would_ it be?  Why does somebody achieving profit become likeable just because they achieved profit?  At _best_ that’s just a neutral thing irrelevant to how nice they are. (Even leaving side the fact that more realistically, it implies negative things about their character.)


----------



## 1927 (Sep 25, 2021)

kabbes said:


> Why _would_ it be?  Why does somebody achieving profit become likeable just because they achieved profit?  At _best_ that’s just a neutral thing irrelevant to how nice they are. (Even leaving side the fact that more realistically, it implies negative things about their character.)


I think theres a difference between someone making a profit and the obscene wealth of Gates and Bezos etc.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 25, 2021)

1927 said:


> I think theres a difference between someone making a profit and the obscene wealth of Gates and Bezos etc.


Making a profit is based on exploitation. How much exploitation is acceptable before you hold up your hand, palm out, and say thus far but no further?


----------



## kabbes (Sep 25, 2021)

1927 said:


> I think theres a difference between someone making a profit and the obscene wealth of Gates and Bezos etc.


Fair enough. I meant profit in this context, ie vast profit through the efforts of others.

Mind you, even if somebody just makes a bit of small-scale profit, that is not something that inherently makes them _likeable_. As I said, at best it’s just neutral.


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Sep 25, 2021)

1927 said:


> That"s a really good point that i hadn't considered before, and maybe others hadn't either. If he's never met her why would he think it likely that he was covered by an agreement signed by the dead paedo? he's backed himself into a corner here big time!


Legalistically, it seems like it's sort of a Schrödinger's cat type defence, ie simultaneously not guilty and guilty at the same time, in the sense of DoY's saying he's not guilty, absolutely not, no way, no sirree, and also, just supposing DoY was guilty, then if he were, the agreement/settlement between Giuffre and Epstein would cover him.

The argument that there's no case to answer because he's not guilty, or in the alternative, there's no case to answer because he's covered by the agreement, is very legalistic, covers all bases. But it does look dodgy as fuck.

To me, it seems like that's how desperate they are for this not to go trial. The stronger argument would be not guilty, full stop, but then if he was found guilty to say, well, he's covered by this agreement, so his guilt is irrelevant. The fact that they've gone with the Schrödinger's type defence is, erm, interesting. Makes me wonder whether it was more of a civil law lawyer rather than a criminal law lawyer who came up with that strategy, relying on the terms of a civil law agreement, and not thinking how that might look in terms of [perception of] guilt.


----------



## 1927 (Sep 25, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> Making a profit is based on exploitation. How much exploitation is acceptable before you hold up your hand, palm out, and say thus far but no further?


Not necessarily.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 25, 2021)

1927 said:


> Not necessarily.


I think you'll find it is

But let's see your working, how can you make a profit without exploitation?


----------



## klang (Sep 25, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> I think you'll find it is
> 
> But let's see your working, how can you make a profit without exploitation?


by selling lots of really expensive stuff


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 25, 2021)

klang said:


> by selling lots of really expensive stuff


Which has been made by people whose labour has been exploited


----------



## klang (Sep 25, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> Which has been made by people whose labour has been exploited


maybe sell diy kits then?


----------



## maomao (Sep 25, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> I think you'll find it is
> 
> But let's see your working, how can you make a profit without exploitation?


Gambling and beating a bookmaker.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 25, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> I think you'll find it is
> 
> But let's see your working, how can you make a profit without exploitation?




Buy selling something to rich people that they can buy easy as pish on the internet and marking it up. e.g. airplane tickets...


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 25, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Buy selling something to rich people that they can buy easy as pish on the internet and marking it up. e.g. airplane tickets...


Pilots and cabin crew and ancillary staff all still exploited, mind


----------



## Saul Goodman (Sep 25, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> I think you'll find it is
> 
> But let's see your working, how can you make a profit without exploitation?


Kidnapping rich people.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 25, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> Kidnapping rich people.


 miles better than anything 1927 would have suggested


----------



## Saul Goodman (Sep 25, 2021)

maomao said:


> Gambling and beating a bookmaker.


Forget the gambling. Just charge people a tenner a time to beat bookmakers.


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 25, 2021)

Q Enterprises which I own makes quite a good profit, however since I am it's entire workforce I suppose technically I am exploiting myself.


----------



## Serge Forward (Sep 25, 2021)

1927 said:


> Not necessarily.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 25, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> Pilots and cabin crew and ancillary staff all still exploited, mind




Fuck all to do with me, they could buy their tickets from ba.com and those people would still be exploited. The people I exploit are the rich fuckers


----------



## Wilf (Sep 25, 2021)

AnnO'Neemus said:


> Legalistically, it seems like it's sort of a Schrödinger's cat type defence, ie simultaneously not guilty and guilty at the same time, in the sense of DoY's saying he's not guilty, absolutely not, no way, no sirree, and also, just supposing DoY was guilty, then if he were, the agreement/settlement between Giuffre and Epstein would cover him.
> 
> The argument that there's no case to answer because he's not guilty, or in the alternative, there's no case to answer because he's covered by the agreement, is very legalistic, covers all bases. But it does look dodgy as fuck.
> 
> To me, it seems like that's how desperate they are for this not to go trial. The stronger argument would be not guilty, full stop, but then if he was found guilty to say, well, he's covered by this agreement, so his guilt is irrelevant. The fact that they've gone with the Schrödinger's type defence is, erm, interesting. Makes me wonder whether it was more of a civil law lawyer rather than a criminal law lawyer who came up with that strategy, relying on the terms of a civil law agreement, and not thinking how that might look in terms of [perception of] guilt.


That puts it better than I would have, but is just what I was thinking.  There was only ever a single good 'look' that he could have reached for in his defence, which was not guilty.  Whether that 'not guilty' was made up of 'it must have been a faked photo' through to 'did have sex but it was consensual and non-trafficked' would get less and less of a good look, but nonetheless a not guilty approach.  What he has gone with might be a legally consistent strategy for the moment, in the sense that lawyers can advise all kind of apparently contradictory legal moves to stop a thing in it's tracks.  However it seems to me the Scrondinger's 'I didn't do it but even if I did I am pre-excused from legal action' causes massive problems for him if it ultimately gets to a court. 

Unless of course they are arguing that the earlier agreement meant she couldn't sue _anybody _for epstein related abuse.  Now that would be a _really _interesting line of argument.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 25, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Fuck all to do with me, they could buy their tickets from ba.com and those people would still be exploited. The people I exploit are the rich fuckers


Who answers your telephones?


----------



## 1927 (Sep 25, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Who answers your telephones?


Maybe he pays his telephone answering staff mega bucks!


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 25, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Who answers your telephones?




I do, why?


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 25, 2021)

1927 said:


> Maybe he pays his telephone answering staff mega bucks!


Maybe he doesn’t have customer support. Which would be odd. Or maybe they profit share, which would be equally unusual but not unheard of.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 25, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I do, why?


I that a rhetorical question? Lol


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 25, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> I that a rhetorical question? Lol




I that a rhetorical question?


Are you exploiting a non-English speaker to post for you or something?


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 25, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I that a rhetorical question?
> 
> 
> Are you exploiting a non-English speaker to post for you or something?


Are you being racist? 

So ergo if you’re employing people directly then how isn’t that in any way an exploitation of Labour?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 25, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Are you being racist?
> 
> So ergo if you’re employing people directly then how isn’t that in any way an exploitation of Labour?



My company currently has three employees, me, Frau Bahn and Ken. Ken has been on furlough since last April, I have been topping his wages up to 100% and paying the NI all the way through out of my own pocket. He also has been working and will continue to do so when furlough ends for Waitrose. If anyone has been exploited here it is you for paying your taxes to fund Ken’s alcohism.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 25, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> My company currently has three employees, me, Frau Bahn and Ken. Ken has been on furlough since last April, I have been topping his wages up to 100% and paying the NI all the way through out of my own pocket. He also has been working and will continue to do so when furlough ends for Waitrose. If anyone has been exploited here it is you for paying your taxes to fund Ken’s alcohism.


I admire the wriggle towards a specific time period to build an opposing argument upon, but you have been in business preceding the pandemic. I don’t care tbh. But don’t bullshit.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 25, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> I admire the wriggle towards a specific time period to build an opposing argument upon, but you have been in business preceding the pandemic. I don’t care tbh. But don’t bullshit.



Yeah, I’m a right cunt capitalist, exploiting Ken for years.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 25, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Yeah, I’m a right cunt capitalist, exploiting Ken for years.


And do you have a cleaner? Or does Ken do that also?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 25, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> And do you have a cleaner? Or does Ken do that also?




I do it. Ken gave advice as to the vacuum cleaner to go for though, it was/is good and I didn’t pay him any bonus for that advice.


----------



## andysays (Sep 25, 2021)

I think I preferred this thread when it was about the rain...


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 25, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I do it. Ken gave advice as to the vacuum cleaner to go for though, it was/is good and I didn’t pay him any bonus for that advice.


Imagine all the holidays you aren’t selling whilst you’re dusting the skirting boards!


----------



## DaveCinzano (Sep 25, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Imagine all the holidays you aren’t selling whilst you’re dusting the skirting boards!


Hark at Henry T Ford here!


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 25, 2021)

Anyway, it’s massively OT and I’m not bothered tbh. It’s just a bit reluctant landlord.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 25, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Imagine all the holidays you aren’t selling whilst you’re dusting the skirting boards!



I don’t sell holidays.


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 25, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> My company currently has three employees, me, Frau Bahn and Ken. Ken has been on furlough since last April, I have been topping his wages up to 100% and paying the NI all the way through out of my own pocket. He also has been working and will continue to do so when furlough ends for Waitrose. If anyone has been exploited here it is you for paying your taxes to fund Ken’s alcohism.


Are you the exclusive owner of Strasse AG or does Frau Bahn hold shares? With Q Enterprises whilst I am the entire workforce and management structure, it does have two shareholders, one of whom is also myself wearing yet another hat and Mrs Q who does not wear any hats but does receive dividends when they are paid.


----------



## two sheds (Sep 25, 2021)

Could you get Ken to sell holidays?


----------



## two sheds (Sep 25, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> Are you the exclusive owner of Strasse AG or does Frau Bahn hold shares? With Q Enterprises whilst I am the entire workforce and management structure, it does have two shareholders, one of whom is also myself wearing yet another hat and Mrs Q who does not wear any hats but does receive dividends when they are paid.


for tax reasons????


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 25, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I don’t sell holidays.


Flights then. Which I connect to holidays. Given that’s the only time I’d use one.


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 25, 2021)

two sheds said:


> for tax reasons????


Absolutely why would anyone do it otherwise?


----------



## two sheds (Sep 25, 2021)

HA !!! That should be going to pay Ken's wages.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 25, 2021)

two sheds said:


> Could you get Ken to sell holidays?




No, he’s furloughed and my business doesn’t sell holidays. Do try to keep up grandad.


----------



## weltweit (Sep 25, 2021)

Sue said:


> That's a reason for liking someone?





weltweit said:


> Sure, why not?


I work in private companies, it is my role to make enough to pay the bills and survive to fight another year. I saw Bill Gates and Microsoft, his baby, seemingly flying ahead making his products almost a requirement in companies, including mine, even when there are FOC alternatives available (Office). He seemed a thoughtful and intelligent individual. Despite this, if he was embroiled in Epstein's abuses he will deserve all he gets.

It is more to do with Gates's style. I don't for example have any feeling for Steve Balmer who made MS more money than Gates, nor for Satya Nadella MS's latest CEO. 


kabbes said:


> Why _would_ it be?  Why does somebody achieving profit become likeable just because they achieved profit?  At _best_ that’s just a neutral thing irrelevant to how nice they are. (Even leaving side the fact that more realistically, it implies negative things about their character.)


Gates was successful despite significant competition, it is that that I like.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 25, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> Are you the exclusive owner of Strasse AG or does Frau Bahn hold shares? With Q Enterprises whilst I am the entire workforce and management structure, it does have two shareholders, one of whom is also myself wearing yet another hat and Mrs Q who does not wear any hats but does receive dividends when they are paid.




Frau Bahn is a shareholding director. She is also a member of the Institute of Bookkeepers and has her own bookkeeping company.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 25, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Flights then. Which I connect to holidays. Given that’s the only time I’d use one.




People’s fly for reasons other than holidays.


----------



## two sheds (Sep 25, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> No, he’s furloughed and my business doesn’t sell holidays. Do try to keep up grandad.


That's the problem with you younguns: no ambition, no eye for a new market ...


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 25, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> People’s fly for reasons other than holidays.


Well yeah, but I didn’t realise you were in a different branch of the industry given holiday flights are probably the most common.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 25, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Well yeah, but I didn’t realise you were in a different branch of the industry given holiday flights are probably the most common.




I did state exactly what I do on this thread today…


Bahnhof Strasse said:


> selling something to rich people that they can buy easy as pish on the internet and marking it up. e.g. airplane tickets...


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 25, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I did state exactly what I do on this thread today…


Rich people don’t take holidays? Arguably anyone who can afford plane travel is rich. Somewhat ambiguous for me to make another conclusion.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 25, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Rich people don’t take holidays? Arguably anyone who can afford plane travel is rich. Somewhat ambiguous for me to make another conclusion.



Only rich people take flights? 

On a global scale perhaps what you state isn’t nonsense, but on a European level it is demonstrable bollocks.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 25, 2021)

Plus I don’t understand your ticket tout business model. If they could simply buy the ticket cheaper elsewhere for cheaper, why don’t they?


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 25, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Only rich people take flights?
> 
> On a global scale perhaps what you state isn’t nonsense, but on a European level it is demonstrable bollocks.


Depends what you consider to be ‘rich’.


----------



## weltweit (Sep 25, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Plus I don’t understand your ticket tout business model. If they could simply buy the ticket cheaper elsewhere for cheaper, why don’t they?


If you could get Apache Office for free why, would you pay for Microsoft Office? Millions do!


----------



## two sheds (Sep 25, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Plus I don’t understand your ticket tout business model. If they could simply buy the ticket cheaper elsewhere for cheaper, why don’t they?




They like Ken


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 25, 2021)

weltweit said:


> If you could get Apache Office for free why, would you pay for Microsoft Office? Millions do!


I got a deal for Office through work. Lots of other software I’d have preferred but coincidentally a mate has just sent me a spreadsheet so prob the first time ever I’ve needed excel outside of work.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 25, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Plus I don’t understand your ticket tout business model. If they could simply buy the ticket cheaper elsewhere for cheaper, why don’t they?



I suspect the trick is to find customers who are spending someone else's money.

I've long since given up despairing at the proliferation of pointless middlemen who make more money than I ever will. TBH I wish I didn't have a conscience, then I too could get a slice of the contracting a subcontractor to contract a subcontractor to get an agent to hire a consultant to get someone to wipe the arse of someone who can't be arsed to do it themselves business.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 25, 2021)

Silly me, I thought this thread was about a non-sweaty nonce.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 25, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Plus I don’t understand your ticket tout business model. If they could simply buy the ticket cheaper elsewhere for cheaper, why don’t they?




Because they want me to be wealthy.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 25, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Depends what you consider to be ‘rich’.




Where is you ‘rich’ line?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 25, 2021)

two sheds said:


> They like Ken




No they don’t, well most don’t.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 25, 2021)

weltweit said:


> I work in private companies, it is my role to make enough to pay the bills and survive to fight another year. I saw Bill Gates and Microsoft, his baby, seemingly flying ahead making his products almost a requirement in companies, including mine, even when there are FOC alternatives available (Office). He seemed a thoughtful and intelligent individual. Despite this, if he was embroiled in Epstein's abuses he will deserve all he gets.
> 
> It is more to do with Gates's style. I don't for example have any feeling for Steve Balmer who made MS more money than Gates, nor for Satya Nadella MS's latest CEO.
> 
> Gates was successful despite significant competition, it is that that I like.


You have to be on the wind up. Your naiveté is absolutely staggering.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 25, 2021)

cupid_stunt said:


> Silly me, I thought this thread was about





equationgirl said:


> You have to be on the wind up. Your naiveté is absolutely staggering.



You never met Welty before?


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 25, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> You never met Welty before?


I have, this is somewhat more compared to usual.


----------



## Serge Forward (Sep 25, 2021)

Good grief. Can we go back to talking about Nonce Andrew please?


----------



## two sheds (Sep 25, 2021)

I'd like to hear more about Ken.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 25, 2021)

He's accepted he's been served the papers so am guessing the lawyers finally got through to him.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 25, 2021)

SpookyFrank said:


> I suspect the trick is to find customers who are spending someone else's money.
> 
> I've long since given up despairing at the proliferation of pointless middlemen who make more money than I ever will. TBH I wish I didn't have a conscience, then I too could get a slice of the contracting a subcontractor to contract a subcontractor to get an agent to hire a consultant to get someone to wipe the arse of someone who can't be arsed to do it themselves business.




What you are failing to understand is that many people are happy to pay people to do the mundane shit in life. Arranging travel is boring. If you have someone whom you trust to get you a decent deal (not the best) and who will take a fee that you approve of, why not use me? Enough people do see things that way. You wouldn’t but then you and Magnus McGinty are not in any danger of being in a position to call upon my services.


----------



## keybored (Sep 25, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> If anyone has been exploited here it is you for paying your taxes to fund Ken’s alcohism.


Is Ken really an alcohic?


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 25, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Where is you ‘rich’ line?


Good question. Another one to ask is where is your ‘poor’ line?


----------



## andysays (Sep 25, 2021)

two sheds said:


> I'd like to hear more about Ken.





equationgirl said:


> He's accepted he's been served the papers so am guessing the lawyers finally got through to him.


I hope I'm not the only one who read the second post here as a response to the first


----------



## xenon (Sep 25, 2021)

What actually happens now in this civil case. I’m guessing he can’t be compelled to give evidence or a defence in camera. If that is the right word. So they find against him in his absence. Then?


----------



## xenon (Sep 25, 2021)

Nonce Andrew obviously not Ken. Who is a stand-up guy, who likes a drink, apparently.


----------



## _Russ_ (Sep 25, 2021)

OK, Who is this Ken you speak of?


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 25, 2021)

andysays said:


> I think I preferred this thread when it was about the rain...


Yeah sorry for derail, sometimes you can make what you think is a minor dig and then be bogged down for hours. Best we stick to looking at the paedo Prince though I think.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 25, 2021)

_Russ_ said:


> OK, Who is this Ken you speak of?


Barbie's boyfriend.


----------



## maomao (Sep 25, 2021)

_Russ_ said:


> OK, Who is this Ken you speak of?


Bass player out of Bros.


----------



## two sheds (Sep 25, 2021)

Multi-talented is Ken


----------



## steveseagull (Sep 25, 2021)

I came here for updates on His Royal Nonce, got loads of notifications,  and all I find is tedious shite


----------



## Athos (Sep 25, 2021)

xenon said:


> What actually happens now in this civil case. I’m guessing he can’t be compelled to give evidence or a defence in camera. If that is the right word. So they find against him in his absence. Then?


My guess is that, having failed to deny service, he'll initially try to have the claim struck out on some procedural grounds e.g. jurisdiction or the settlement in the Epstein case, and, if that fails, he'll have to decide whether to defend the substance of the case or not.  If he does, he'd be effectively accepting the court's jurisdiction, which would make it very hard for him the prevent any judgement against him being enforced in the UK, and it'd mean the public airing of much dirty laundry.  If he doesn't defend it, judgement will be entered against him by default; that'd be a stain on his character - effectively a court ruling that he's a nonce - but would mean it would be very hard for her to actually get hold of any of his assets.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Sep 25, 2021)

Athos said:


> .  If he doesn't defend it, judgement will be entered against him by default; *that'd be a stain on his character.*


🤣
Would it even be possible to defame him at this stage.


----------



## Athos (Sep 25, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> 🤣
> Would it even be possible to defame him at this stage.



Quite.  Which is why he might prefer to allow judgement to be entered, keep any other skeletons in the closet and protect his assets, since he's no chance of salvaging his reputation, now, anyway.


----------



## xenon (Sep 25, 2021)

steveseagull said:


> I came here for updates on His Royal Nonce, got loads of notifications,  and all I find is tedious shite



You subscribe to threads? People actually do that? LOL


----------



## Saul Goodman (Sep 25, 2021)

Athos said:


> Quite.  Which is why he might prefer to allow judgement to be entered, keep any other skeletons in the closet and protect his assets, since he's no chance of salvaging his reputation, now, anyway.


Most likely outcome.


----------



## steveseagull (Sep 25, 2021)

xenon said:


> You subscribe to threads? People actually do that? LOL



Only ones that are about Royal nonces. and a cookery one.


----------



## Athos (Sep 25, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> Most likely outcome.


Yes, unless he can settle cheaply without admitting liability.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Sep 25, 2021)

Athos said:


> Yes, unless he can settle cheaply without admitting liability.


Hard to guess whatll happen though, as nobody would ever have expected that interview to happen. Maybe he's so thick and privileged that he thinks hell do an O. J.


----------



## xenon (Sep 25, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> Hard to guess whatll happen though, as nobody would ever have expected that interview to happen. Maybe he's so thick and privileged that he thinks hell do an O. J.



If he does not sweat, you must forget.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Sep 25, 2021)

xenon said:


> If he does not sweat, you must forget.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 25, 2021)

xenon said:


> What actually happens now in this civil case. I’m guessing he can’t be compelled to give evidence or a defence in camera. If that is the right word. So they find against him in his absence. Then?


Then he probably has an accident of the surprisingly fatal kind.


----------



## steveseagull (Sep 28, 2021)

This is inconvenient


----------



## TopCat (Sep 28, 2021)

killer b said:


> but he met and hung out with him after he was convicted of child sex offences, that was the question he was asked in the clip?


The key issue which he evaded really badly, no moral compass at best, filthy kiddy nonce rapist at worst.


----------



## TopCat (Sep 28, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> If he was a leader in such things at Microsoft then I see no reason to conclude he simply joined in as a participant rather than being an organiser


I can see you post revolution comrade, staring down your magisterial glasses as you make comments like this.


----------



## TopCat (Sep 28, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> Forget the gambling. Just charge people a tenner a time to beat bookmakers.


im in.


----------



## TopCat (Sep 28, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> Then he probably has an accident of the surprisingly fatal kind.


Heart attack in his sleep.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 28, 2021)

Wonder how Andy nonce Windsor has ringfenced  his assets ? There is fuck all chance this will have been overlooked. He might effectively have nothing to his name


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 28, 2021)

not-bono-ever said:


> Wonder how Andy nonce Windsor has ringfenced  his assets ? There is fuck all chance this will have been overlooked. He might effectively have nothing to his name


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 28, 2021)

not-bono-ever said:


> Wonder how Andy nonce Windsor has ringfenced  his assets ? There is fuck all chance this will have been overlooked. He might effectively have nothing to his name


Does he have any actual assets?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 28, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> Does he have any actual assets?




He has a place in Verbier that is currently being sold for £17m to settle a £6m debt he has on it; Prince Andrew to sell Swiss ski-resort chalet to settle $9M lawsuit

I think his mum may have a few quid stashed away too.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 28, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> He has a place in Verbier that is currently being sold for £17m to settle a £6m debt he has on it; Prince Andrew to sell Swiss ski-resort chalet to settle $9M lawsuit
> 
> I think his mum may have a few quid stashed away too.


yeh she's got jars and jars of auld £1 notes and coins.


----------



## Chilli.s (Sep 28, 2021)

Isn't he a non taxpayer too?  Gets 250k of mum every year tax free.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 28, 2021)

Chilli.s said:


> Isn't he a non taxpayer too?  Gets 250k of mum every year tax free.


i believe he still contributes something to the country's coffers through his payment of vat and purchase of pizzas


----------



## Raheem (Sep 28, 2021)

It will all be in Fergie's name (and/or the kids), won't it?

Still, given the way he's handled everything else, there's reason to hope his financial arrangements will be completely ineffective on shielding him from having to cough up.


----------



## gosub (Sep 28, 2021)

How is he still alive?


Fucking claims "he's too honourable"......should have retire to his study with a Webley and a brandy long ago


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 28, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> Does he have any actual assets?


He’s just sold skiing chalet for sixteen or so million. His home is probably ‘grace and favour’. Drives a Bentley. Nice work, if you can get it.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 28, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> i believe he still contributes something to the country's coffers through his payment of vat and purchase of pizzas




Though not through taxes on drinks at the bar in Tramp, the round-dodging nonce.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 28, 2021)

There is a reason why the royals maintain vast estates and undreamed of wealth - I’m sure his personal liability potential will be utterly minimal but utterly legal


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 28, 2021)

Tatler always has the inside line

“Neither of them [Andrew or Sarah] have their own property and they wanted to buy the chalet as an asset to leave to their children’.









						French socialite revealed as former friend suing Prince Andrew and Sarah, Duchess of York for £6.7 million owed on Swiss ski chalet
					

The Yorks have found themselves in financial hot water following the Epstein scandal




					www.tatler.com


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 28, 2021)

not-bono-ever said:


> Tatler always has the inside line
> 
> “Neither of them [Andrew or Sarah] have their own property and they wanted to buy the chalet as an asset to leave to their children’.
> 
> ...


That worked out well for the kids, apart from the massive debt on it.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 28, 2021)

not-bono-ever said:


> Tatler always has the inside line
> 
> “Neither of them [Andrew or Sarah] have their own property and they wanted to buy the chalet as an asset to leave to their children’.
> 
> ...




So they bought the place with a mortgage and cash, but didn't stump up any cash. They really are a pair of freeloading fucks. Nice to see they are selling at a loss, business envoy my sweaty arse.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 28, 2021)

Swiss property law and ownership status is very curious. As we all know from personal experience obvs.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 28, 2021)

He is effectively dossing on his mums sofa. He doesn’t have a gaff of his own. Dolescum


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 28, 2021)

Interesting to learn that Land Rover gives him (and the other parasitic scumbags) a new Range Rover whenever they ask for one, seeing it as an advertising coup, al la Aston Martin/James Bond. Just need to get it out there, ~#NonceRover...


----------



## DaveCinzano (Sep 28, 2021)

not-bono-ever said:


> He is effectively dossing on his mums sofa. He doesn’t have a gaff of his own. Dolescum


As the _Tatler_ reports:


> the Duke has ‘been forced to rely on a small Navy pension, estimated at around £20,000 a year...


😥


> ...along with a reported annual allowance from the Queen of around £250,000.’


😂


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 28, 2021)

They did own a home at one point but sold up to some Sheikh or other when buyers were a bit thin on the ground. Probably because debts and a sweetener for some other deal. Don’t think it’s been lived in since. The mind boggles.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 28, 2021)

not-bono-ever said:


> He is effectively dossing on his mums sofa. He doesn’t have a gaff of his own. Dolescum


He lives in Royal Lodge in Windsor. I wouldn’t mind that kind of sofa if someone else cleaned it…


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 28, 2021)

They bought a lemon house in sunningdale iirc and were waist deep in negative equity. A mysterious Kazakh biz “ness man bought it for a stupidly high price and let it rot. I dunno. Looks a bit questionable to me.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 28, 2021)

Imagine if your job was cleaning up Prince Andrew’s shit?  Solidarity.


----------



## dessiato (Sep 28, 2021)

My sister is absolutely adamant that he is innocent. No matter what is said he can't possibly have done it. She relates, somehow, to the Prince what's his name and Oprah Winfrey. She has a very interesting logical. Not that I can understand it.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Sep 28, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> He lives in Royal Lodge in Windsor. I wouldn’t mind that kind of sofa if someone else cleaned it…


It's not like he'd be feverishly sweating into the fabric as he snored through his non-sordid slumbers


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 28, 2021)

not-bono-ever said:


> They bought a lemon house in sunningdale iirc and were waist deep in negative equity. A mysterious Kazakh biz “ness man bought it for a stupidly high price and let it rot. I dunno. Looks a bit questionable to me.




2 million over the asking price for a derelict house that had not been able to make the asking price for over 5 years. 

Sounds legit.


----------



## maomao (Sep 28, 2021)

DaveCinzano said:


> It's not like he'd be feverishly sweating into the fabric as he snored through his non-sordid slumbers


Even if he doesn't sweat, I bet he doesn't clean up.his own jizz.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Sep 28, 2021)

maomao said:


> Even if he doesn't sweat, I bet he doesn't clean up.his own jizz.


He has a Seminiferous Valet for that.

Ironically for a Royal, it is he who has to show deferens to his servant.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 28, 2021)

How can he not sweat? Is that legit? It’s a biological process of cooling body temperature. If that was unavailable to him you’d expect he’d be spending time in Norway rather than kissing dodgy palms in the Middle East.


----------



## maomao (Sep 28, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> How can he not sweat? Is that legit? It’s a biological process of cooling body temperature. If that was unavailable to him you’d expect he’d be spending time in Norway rather than kissing dodgy palms in the Middle East.


My paternal granny always claimed to be unable to sweat. Don't know why, she wasn't in the Falklands. She lived oop north so it wasn't a big issue most of the time.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 28, 2021)

maomao said:


> My paternal granny always claimed to be unable to sweat. Don't know why, she wasn't in the Falklands. She lived oop north so it wasn't a big issue most of the time.




Grans do talk a massive pile of shit though, mine claimed that if you ate the pips of an apple you'd get trees growing out of your ears


----------



## Raheem (Sep 28, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Grans do talk a massive pile of shit though, mine claimed that if you ate the pips of an apple you'd get trees growing out of your ears


That can actually work, you know. Although you have to die soon after and be buried in a shallow grave.


----------



## Chilli.s (Sep 28, 2021)

TBF if I had a quarter mill a year pocket money I'd not be sweating much


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 28, 2021)

Mine just endlessly reminded me how to pronounce liquorice (not ish!) and was annoyed when I called Christmas Xmas. Fun times back when it was bows and arrows.


----------



## Chilli.s (Sep 28, 2021)

And free cars and houses


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 28, 2021)

Hold on a fucking moment; Harry & Meghan were famously stripped of their publicly funded security when they stopped being 'working royals'. So what were police doing guarding the gate of the sweaty nonce's gaff the other day when he is also a non-working royal? Huh?


----------



## Sue (Sep 28, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Grans do talk a massive pile of shit though, mine claimed that if you ate the pips of an apple you'd get trees growing out of your ears


What were her views on swallowing chewing gum? Instant death I'm guessing?


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 28, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Hold on a fucking moment; Harry & Meghan were famously stripped of their publicly funded security when they stopped being 'working royals'. So what were police doing guarding the gate of the sweaty nonce's gaff the other day when he is also a non-working royal? Huh?


Maybe his Union advised that he was simply suspended with pay. 🤣


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 28, 2021)

Sue said:


> What were her views on swallowing chewing gum? Instant death I'm guessing?




Sticks to your ribs.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 28, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Hold on a fucking moment; Harry & Meghan were famously stripped of their publicly funded security when they stopped being 'working royals'. So what were police doing guarding the gate of the sweaty nonce's gaff the other day when he is also a non-working royal? Huh?


Complain to the regulator, oftoff


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 28, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Hold on a fucking moment; Harry & Meghan were famously stripped of their publicly funded security when they stopped being 'working royals'. So what were police doing guarding the gate of the sweaty nonce's gaff the other day when he is also a non-working royal? Huh?


A working royal is a contradiction in terms


----------



## maomao (Sep 28, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Hold on a fucking moment; Harry & Meghan were famously stripped of their publicly funded security when they stopped being 'working royals'. So what were police doing guarding the gate of the sweaty nonce's gaff the other day when he is also a non-working royal? Huh?


It's also completely illogical. If monarchy is some sort of birthright then he's the Duke of fucking York and a member of the royal family whether he's a nonce or not.  He should be forced to carry on with royal duties. See how many people want to shake his sweaty nonce hands.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 28, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> A working royal is a contradiction in terms




A misnomer.


----------



## maomao (Sep 28, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Mine just endlessly reminded me how to pronounce liquorice (not ish!) and was annoyed when I called Christmas Xmas. Fun times back when it was bows and arrows.


She's wrong by the way. Unless she's an American it's definitely a 'sh' at the end.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 28, 2021)

maomao said:


> It's also completely illogical. If monarchy is some sort of birthright then he's the Duke of fucking York and a member of the royal family whether he's a nonce or not.  He should be forced to carry on with royal duties. See how many people want to shake his sweaty nonce hands.




People who support the monarchy are not logical though, it's an aberration.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 28, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> A working royal is a contradiction in terms


Morons of the oxy variety.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 28, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Hold on a fucking moment; Harry & Meghan were famously stripped of their publicly funded security when they stopped being 'working royals'. So what were police doing guarding the gate of the sweaty nonce's gaff the other day when he is also a non-working royal? Huh?



They left 'the firm', he hasn't, he needs the cover, the cunt.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 28, 2021)

They ‘left’ but are both yapping out of their bag for cash. Living in a £17M mansion. Wokeism for cash. Pretty irritating.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 28, 2021)

Chilli.s said:


> Isn't he a non taxpayer too?  Gets 250k of mum every year tax free.


Isn't he off the civil list now?  Not sure if that makes him a tax payer though.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 28, 2021)

Being lectured on climate by private jet users and poverty by millionaires is pretty galling. 
At least they’re not nonces I suppose.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 28, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Being lectured on climate by private jet users and poverty by millionaires is pretty galling.
> At least they’re not nonces I suppose.


You hope


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 28, 2021)

Well yeah.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Sep 28, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> Complain to the regulator, oftoff


I'm all for regulatin' Royals, but you can't be just any geek off the street


----------



## Serge Forward (Sep 28, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Mine just endlessly reminded me how to pronounce liquorice


It's pronounced "spanish".


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 28, 2021)

Serge Forward said:


> It's pronounced "spanish".


She was wrong. And she treated my mother like shit. Was always ok with me but I side with my mam really.


----------



## Serge Forward (Sep 28, 2021)

No, I  mean liquorice is pronounced Spanish... it always was when I was a kid


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 28, 2021)

Serge Forward said:


> No, I  mean liquorice is pronounced Spanish... it always was when I was a kid


Yes, sorry lol. She was wrong on the pronunciation. But that was one of her things. Correcting me on a pronunciation that was wrong. And being a bit religious. She was an arsehole though.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Sep 28, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> They did own a Home County at one point


FTFY


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 28, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Mine just endlessly reminded me how to pronounce liquorice (not ish!) and was annoyed when I called Christmas Xmas. Fun times back when it was bows and arrows.


People pronounce it in so many different ways which is why they call it liquorice allsorts


----------



## Dom Traynor (Sep 28, 2021)

Serge Forward said:


> No, I  mean liquorice is pronounced Spanish... it always was when I was a kid


Liqoreechay?


----------



## Ron Merlin (Sep 28, 2021)

maomao said:


> My paternal granny always claimed to be unable to sweat. Don't know why, she wasn't in the Falklands. She lived oop north so it wasn't a big issue most of the time.


Makes me think of what my mum says: "pigs sweat, men perspire and ladies glow".


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 28, 2021)

Tories fuck pig’s heads their bosses are pig headed nonces. Needs to rhyme though.


----------



## Chilli.s (Sep 28, 2021)

Wilf said:


> Isn't he off the civil list now?  Not sure if that makes him a tax payer though.


I think the civil list as such is gone now. As far as I know the queen gets a lump sum every year and divvies it out herself, how she chooses to do that I'm not sure


----------



## Glitter (Sep 28, 2021)

Serge Forward said:


> No, I  mean liquorice is pronounced Spanish... it always was when I was a kid



My Gran used to call it ‘Spanish’. Thanks for that lovely reminder <3


----------



## Wilf (Sep 28, 2021)

Chilli.s said:


> I think the civil list as such is gone now. As far as I know the queen gets a lump sum every year and divvies it out herself, how she chooses to do that I'm not sure


'Charles! Put that fucking plant down and send the sweaty nonce in for his money!'
- Erm, yes Mama.
'Oh and he's _still _my favourite. What does that say about you?'


----------



## steveseagull (Oct 1, 2021)

[ed: image removed]


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 1, 2021)

Yeah, that's inappropriate for the thread steveseagull . Please remove it.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 1, 2021)

Its funny but recycled.


----------



## ska invita (Oct 1, 2021)

Exclusive: Queen spending millions to fund Prince Andrew’s fight against sex abuse allegations
					

Financial intervention was considered a necessity, as Duke has no discernible income, and means Buckingham Palace is updated on developments




					www.telegraph.co.uk
				




so tax payers money basically


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 1, 2021)

Socialise the losses! Lol


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 1, 2021)

ska invita said:


> Exclusive: Queen spending millions to fund Prince Andrew’s fight against sex abuse allegations
> 
> 
> Financial intervention was considered a necessity, as Duke has no discernible income, and means Buckingham Palace is updated on developments
> ...


“Duke has no discernable income”.  How does he live, then?


----------



## ska invita (Oct 1, 2021)

danny la rouge said:


> “Duke has no discernable income”.  How does he live, then?


he actually works bloody hard and does a great deal for tourism to the uk


----------



## two sheds (Oct 1, 2021)

discernable = detectable 

 wonder where it comes from


----------



## steveseagull (Oct 1, 2021)

ska invita said:


> he actually works bloody hard and does a great deal for tourism to the uk


This is global Britain and he is centre stage


----------



## ska invita (Oct 1, 2021)

steveseagull said:


> This is global Britain and he is centre stage


ive a memory he was a trade envoy at some point
what a country this is


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 1, 2021)

ska invita said:


> ive a memory he was a trade envoy at some point
> what a country this is



Give the spare to the heir something to do. Like, sell arms.
We don’t get involved in politics.


----------



## ska invita (Oct 1, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Give the spare to the heir something to do. Like, sell arms.
> We don’t get involved in politics.


Talking of arms dealing establishment cunts i wonder what Maggies son the  Honourable Sir Mark Thatcher Baron on Scotney is up to ...a fair few years since his failed coup of Guinea. I wonder if he has any discernable income?


----------



## Santino (Oct 1, 2021)

steveseagull said:


> View attachment 290889





Magnus McGinty said:


> Its funny but recycled.


Have you two paid any attention to recent discourse about misogyny?


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 1, 2021)

ska invita said:


> Talking of arms dealing cunts i wonder what Maggies son the  Honourable Sir Mark Thatcher Baron on Scotney is up to ...a fair few years since his failed coup of Guinea.



In a somewhat unexpected move he was just supplying an air ambulance for Equatorial Guinea.
Maybe for the Mercenaries? 
Don’t think he can visit the States anytime soon much like Andrew.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 1, 2021)

Santino said:


> Have you two paid any attention to recent discourse about misogyny?



Oral sex is misogyny?


----------



## steveseagull (Oct 1, 2021)

I didn't think we would hear much on this until his next date with the courts at the end of the month but there is likely 101 things an drapidly growing, that are going to give him some serious insomnia!









						Prince Andrew can review Epstein estate deal, accuser says
					

Virginia Giuffre sued Andrew claiming Jeffrey Epstein recruited her for sex with the British prince when she was a teen.




					www.aljazeera.com


----------



## steveseagull (Oct 1, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Oral sex is misogyny?


I did a bit of oral sex once or twice back in the day.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 1, 2021)

steveseagull said:


> I did a bit of oral sex once or twice back in the day.



It isn’t a rape joke, the punchline is wordplay about a stomach settler but perhaps we’re wrong.


----------



## Santino (Oct 1, 2021)

The punchline is about a 14 year old.


----------



## steveseagull (Oct 1, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> punchline is wordplay about a stomach settler




This mate


----------



## Santino (Oct 1, 2021)

State of you


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 1, 2021)

Santino said:


> The punchline is about a 14 year old.



Fair point actually. The original joke which is decades old didn’t mention teenagers.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 1, 2021)

It was “every time I suck Charle’s cock I get indigestion” 
- have you tried Andrew’s?

Which whilst pretty crass isn’t dodgy particularly.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 2, 2021)

Ron Merlin said:


> Makes me think of what my mum says: "pigs sweat, men perspire and ladies glow".



Pigs do not, in fact, sweat.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 2, 2021)

SpookyFrank said:


> Pigs do not, in fact, sweat.



How do they smell?


----------



## Wilf (Oct 2, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> Yeah, that's inappropriate for the thread steveseagull . Please remove it.


This, very much.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Oct 2, 2021)

SpookyFrank said:


> Pigs do not, in fact, sweat.


Ah, you've got them South Georgian Tamworths, haven't you?


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 2, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> It isn’t a rape joke, the punchline is wordplay about a stomach settler but perhaps we’re wrong.


I never said it was a rape joke but thanks for mansplaining inappropriate humour to me.

It's still inappropriate on a thread about HRH's alleged involvement of the exploitation of young women.


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 2, 2021)

Magnus paid so much attention to the opinions of women he has been barred from joining the debate temporarily.


Santino said:


> Have you two paid any attention to recent discourse about misogyny?


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 2, 2021)

Yes. I should be banned from here too.


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 2, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Yes. I should be banned from here too.


That's not what I said. As you well know.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 2, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> That's not what I said. As you well know.


So why suggest it?


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 2, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> So why suggest it?


I didn't. Read what I wrote.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 2, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> I didn't. Read what I wrote.


You ‘mentioned’ in a totally unsolicited context that I’d been ‘banned’ from something. 
Would you like a list of other totally unconnected things I’ve done to randomly mention or was that magically the correct thing?
I don’t want a row with you particularly as I like you. You’re a good egg.


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 2, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> You ‘mentioned’ in a totally unsolicited context that I’d been ‘banned’ from something.
> Would you like a list of other totally unconnected things I’ve done to randomly mention or was that magically the correct thing?
> I don’t want a row with you particularly as I like you. You’re a good egg.


Please do patronise me some more...


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 2, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> Please do patronise me some more...


I wouldn’t want to but also don’t think you want me to either.


----------



## krtek a houby (Oct 2, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Yes. I should be banned from here too.



Maybe take a couple of days, to contemplate, in light of recent developments, if your edgelord persona is really worth the hassle of sticking with.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 2, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> I wouldn’t want to but also don’t think you want me to either.


Give it a rest you boring bastard.


----------



## andysays (Oct 2, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Yes. I should be banned from here too.


Here's a thought - maybe you should just stop being so fucking melodramatic and stop acting like a cunt across multiple threads.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 2, 2021)

andysays said:


> Here's a thought - maybe you should just stop being so fucking melodramatic and stop acting like a cunt across multiple threads.



Do you even exist in the real world or just on here?
It must be terribly confusing for you.


----------



## andysays (Oct 2, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Do you even exist in the real world or just on here?
> It must be terribly confusing for you.



You're the one constantly whining about how hard done by you are "on here" rather than the real world, even going to the trouble of starting threads dedicated to the subject, so it appears that what happens "on here" is actually of some importance to you, however much you seek to deny it and rubbish everyone else posting "on here".


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 2, 2021)

andysays said:


> You're the one constantly whining about how hard done by you are "on here" rather than the real world, even going to the trouble of starting threads dedicated to the subject, so it appears that what happens "on here" is actually of some importance to you, however much you seek to deny it and rubbish everyone else posting "on here".



Oh you bit. Lol.


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 2, 2021)

Magnus McGinty please can you just leave this thread before you ruin it?

And perhaps have a think about your recent behaviour and why some improvement is called for.


----------



## 1927 (Oct 2, 2021)

ska invita said:


> does a great deal for tourism to the uk


no she doesnt.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 4, 2021)

Sarah Ferguson may be appearing in court to support the nonce's alibi:








						Sarah Ferguson likely to face court amid Prince Andrew's rape case
					

The Duke of York faces sexual abuse allegations filed in a New York court by Virginia Roberts Giuffre.




					www.ibtimes.co.uk
				




Well, that's game set and match if he has the support of someone of such impeccable character... Anyway, I thought the idea was that she was supposed to be away, leading to him doing the pizza express run? Strange sort of alibi.

In some ways this is irrelevant as he would have still had time to get to Tramp.  But what happened to the royal protection officer's logs? Here's one of them seemingly questioning the alibi a year ago:








						A Former Royal Protection Officer Questions Prince Andrew's Pizza Express Alibi
					

He's reportedly requesting access to his work logs to verify the royal's whereabouts.




					www.townandcountrymag.com
				




Neither side seems to have pushed the logs.  Windsor presumably because if produced they would at the very least weaken his alibi, Victoria Giuffre maybe because her side are suspicious the logs would be rewritten to defend the adrenally challenged nonce?


----------



## Aladdin (Oct 4, 2021)

maomao said:


> She's wrong by the way. Unless she's an American it's definitely a 'sh' at the end.


Yep  

Its definitely ish.


----------



## ska invita (Oct 4, 2021)

Wilf said:


> Sarah Ferguson may be appearing in court to support the nonce's alibi:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Are they going to court? I thought they were hiding?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 4, 2021)

Wilf said:


> Sarah Ferguson



Very rude to call her that, she has a title you know, Toe Sucking Freeloader.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 4, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Very rude to call her that, she has a title you know, Toe Sucking Freeloader.


Every time she lies, Budgie the Helicopter crashes and burns.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 4, 2021)

Just thought I'd top up my reasons for hating the grifting shitbag and went to wiki (there's plenty). I'd missed one though, where she goes and sorts out gun crime in Manchester (and makes a film about her gallant efforts).  She also went to Hull to spread the anti-obesity message.








						The Duchess on the estate
					

THE Duchess of York spent 10 days on a Manchester council estate for an eye-opening TV documentary. Sarah Ferguson played pool in a local social club and was shocked by a gun attack on one of her projects.




					www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk
				




Staggering. Brass Eye out-Brass Eyed.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 4, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Very rude to call her that, she has a title you know, Toe Sucking Freeloader.


it was john bryan who did the toe sucking


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 4, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> it was john bryan who did the toe sucking




Ah, was she the suckee and not the sucker on that occasion?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 4, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Ah, was she the suckee and not the sucker on that occasion?


indeed


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 4, 2021)

I stand corrected. And also no longer fancy eating my lunch


----------



## 1927 (Oct 4, 2021)

It could be interesting if she gives evidence, considering she is known to have take money from Epstein and at least one of the other nonces involved to pay off debts!


----------



## Wilf (Oct 4, 2021)

1927 said:


> It could be interesting if she gives evidence, considering she is known to have take money from Epstein and at least one of the other nonces involved to pay off debts!


'I wasn't actually there and indeed my ex-husband's whole pizza express alibi is based on the fact that I wasn't at home, but I can definitely say he went to pizza express, even though it was too early in the evening to provide a real alibi and the royal protection dudes have failed to back this up... and this is to support him in the claim he didn't rape the victim who was trafficked by the bloke who gave me all that free money'. Oh, and can I claim expenses for turning up at the court?


----------



## Badgers (Oct 4, 2021)

Is Fergie back?


----------



## Johnny Doe (Oct 4, 2021)

Badgers said:


> Is Fergie back?


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 4, 2021)

Harry Smiles said:


>


A clear diagram is always appreciated.


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 7, 2021)

Right. So no privity of contract. The sweatless one, although he has never met the plaintiff, believes that a contract between the plaintiff and Epstein precludes the plaintiff from bringing further action against Epstein or anyone else who... what? in relation to what? And that it is binding on the plaintiff even though the defendant doesn't know the terms and isn't party to it.








						Prince Andrew allowed to review settlement between Virginia Giuffre and Jeffrey Epstein
					

A court in New York has granted the royal’s lawyers permission to see the confidential agreement between his accuser and the late financier




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## MrCurry (Oct 7, 2021)

It‘ll be interesting if the agreement provided doesn’t say what Andrew’s team are expecting, which it might not as one of the parties to it is dead and the other has a powerful incentive for it to say something Andrew might not be expecting!


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 7, 2021)

My client never met this woman but if he had met this woman it doesn't matter because she agreed with someone else completely that she couldn't sue my client who has never met her anyway. 
This seems like desperately looking for a legal technicality that might muddy the waters in the hope that they can then persuade the judge to dismiss the case. The fact that he hasn't dropped the case so far makes me believe that the judge has probably made his mind up it should go to trial. I suspect that He Who Cannot Sweat is still clinging to the hope that all this can be magically made to go away somehow and he can go back to Princing. It's a bit like Trump desperately searching for a way to cling on to the Presidency.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 7, 2021)

'This agreement precludes the following nonces from taking action against...'.   

As defences go, it's really out there.


----------



## maomao (Oct 7, 2021)

Tbf he's a bit of a thicko and is doing (and paying for) whatever his lawyers tell him to.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 7, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> My client never met this woman but if he had met this woman it doesn't matter because she agreed with someone else completely that she couldn't sue my client who has never met her anyway.
> This seems like desperately looking for a legal technicality that might muddy the waters in the hope that they can then persuade the judge to dismiss the case. The fact that he hasn't dropped the case so far makes me believe that the judge has probably made his mind up it should go to trial. I suspect that He Who Cannot Sweat is still clinging to the hope that all this can be magically made to go away somehow and he can go back to Princing. It's a bit like Trump desperately searching for a way to cling on to the Presidency.


Yeah, I've no idea whether this will work for him, it might do. But it's hardly the defence an innocent man would reach for.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Oct 7, 2021)

maomao said:


> Tbf he's a bit of a thicko and is doing (and paying for) whatever his lawyers tell him to.


Alternatively his lawyers are just "Hey, you're the client, whadda we know... (But your mum will be picking up the tab after, right?)"


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 7, 2021)

DaveCinzano said:


> Alternatively his lawyers are just "Hey, you're the client, whadda we know... (But your mum will be picking up the tab after, right?)"



Seems that mummy is bankrolling Andy's defence. It's a cracking look that, the monarch shelling out big bucks defending a child sex abuse case. Peak royalty.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Seems that mummy is bankrolling Andy's defence. It's a cracking look that, the monarch shelling out big bucks defending a child sex abuse case. Peak royalty.


it's not mummy bankrolling his defence, it's us, the idiot taxpayers. the sooner he's drowned in a tun of malmsey or raw sewage the better


----------



## seeformiles (Oct 7, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> She was wrong. And she treated my mother like shit. Was always ok with me but I side with my mam really.



My gran pronounced “margarine” with a hard g and she was a complete bitch to my Ma. Perhaps there’s a connection with odd pronunciation in grandmothers and the likelihood they’re despicable old cows? 🤔


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2021)

seeformiles said:


> My gran pronounced “margarine” with a hard g and she was a complete bitch to my Ma. Perhaps there’s a connection with odd pronunciation in grandmothers and the likelihood they’re despicable old cows? 🤔


was this your paternal or maternal gran?


----------



## Flavour (Oct 7, 2021)

Can't wait for the Ghislaine Maxwell testimony, she should be able to see that DoY is low-hanging fruit. She might be able to get away with not implicating some of the other rich and powerful people for whom there is less evidence (and therefore potentially save her own life) if she gives up the juice on Andy


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 7, 2021)

Flavour said:


> Can't wait for the Ghislaine Maxwell testimony, she should be able to see that DoY is low-hanging fruit. She might be able to get away with not implicating some of the other rich and powerful people for whom there is less evidence (and therefore potentially save her own life) if she gives up the juice on Andy


I don't think she's got any real dirt on him or anyone else for that matter or she would have struck a deal long before now. She probably knows of course but has no hard evidence. If she stands up in court and points the finger at his Royal Nonciness then loads of people (deffo including me) are going to believe her but it is going to come down to just her word and that isn't going to be enough.


----------



## Chilli.s (Oct 7, 2021)

There may be some type of intimate descriptor she can use in court, like a highlight of the show type thing. 

he's a dimbo for not settling ages ago and privately with a nda and big bag o'cash


----------



## seeformiles (Oct 7, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> was this your paternal or maternal gran?



Paternal (from Antrim)


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2021)

seeformiles said:


> Paternal (from Antrim)


yeh i've heard of quite a few dads' mums who've been like that (nasty to their wives/partners i mean)


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 7, 2021)

Chilli.s said:


> There may be some type of intimate descriptor she can use in court, like a highlight of the show type thing.
> 
> he's a dimbo for not settling ages ago and privately with a nda and big bag o'cash


I think the fact that he is as dumb as a bag of rocks combined with a massive sense of entitlement is well established by now, He might very well have managed to talk his way out of this by now if he wasn't.


----------



## William of Walworth (Oct 7, 2021)

At risk of continuing an earlier sidetrack here, but I've only just caught up with this thread 

But why on earth would anyone, anywhere, pronounce 'licquorice' as 'Spanish'     ???

100% failing to get that, or have I misunderstood something from those posts?????


----------



## Serge Forward (Oct 7, 2021)

It's a northern (Mancunian?) thing. We always called licorice spanish. If someone actually called it licorice, they were either posh or southern.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 7, 2021)

I don't think it's so much regional as old-school. Licorice sweets used to be called "Spanish" (in, like, the 50s, I think) because the licorice root was imported from Spain.


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 7, 2021)

Raheem said:


> I don't think it's so much regional as old-school. Licorice sweets used to be called "Spanish" (in, like, the 50s, I think) because the licorice root was imported from Spain.


Not from, er, Pontefract then? (Pomfret cakes...)








						Pontefract cake - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## seeformiles (Oct 7, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh i've heard of quite a few dads' mums who've been like that (nasty to their wives/partners i mean)



When I think on it, so have I. Mind you my Ma dotes on Mrs SFM while my MIL wishes I didn’t exist. Perhaps some paternal grandparents live up to the old stereotype of seeing their son’s partner as competition to be the most important female presence in his life - but they tend to be pretty overbearing “Alpha Female” types to begin with 🤔


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2021)

seeformiles said:


> When I think on it, so have I. Mind you my Ma dotes on Mrs SFM while my MIL wishes I didn’t exist. Perhaps some paternal grandparents live up to the old stereotype of seeing their son’s partner as competition to be the most important female presence in his life - but they tend to be pretty overbearing “Alpha Female” types to begin with 🤔


implacable is how i've often thought of them


----------



## discokermit (Oct 7, 2021)

Raheem said:


> I don't think it's so much regional as old-school. Licorice sweets used to be called "Spanish" (in, like, the 50s, I think) because the licorice root was imported from Spain.


"it is colloquially known as 'Spanish', supposedly because Spanish monks grew liquorice root at Rievaulx Abbey near Thirsk"
from wiki.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 7, 2021)

Serge Forward said:


> It's a northern (Mancunian?) thing. We always called licorice spanish. If someone actually called it licorice, they were either posh or southern.



Why do Mancunians call hospital hospickle?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Why do Mancunians call hospital hospickle?


i don't know, why do mancunians call hospital hospickle?


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 7, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> i don't know, why do mancunians call hospital hospickle?



I’m also waiting for the punchline.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> I’m also waiting for the punchline.


that joke isn't funny anymore


----------



## Sue (Oct 7, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> that joke isn't funny anymore


Too close to home and too near the bone, eh?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2021)

Sue said:


> Too close to home and too near the bone, eh?


thought it might be a line from the famous smiths song, hospital/hospickle


----------



## Serge Forward (Oct 7, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> i don't know, why do mancunians call hospital hospickle?


And middle miggle. It's bloody menckul.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 7, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> that joke isn't funny anymore



Very good.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 7, 2021)

Sue said:


> Too close to home and too near the bone, eh?



It’s his strange ways.


----------



## Glitter (Oct 7, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Why do Mancunians call hospital hospickle?



Ospickle. 

H’s aren’t pronounced in Manchester


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 7, 2021)

Glitter said:


> Ospickle.
> 
> H’s aren’t pronounced in Manchester



I started something I couldn’t finish.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 7, 2021)

Glitter said:


> Ospickle.
> 
> H’s aren’t pronounced in Manchester


(H)orse pickle.


----------



## Dogsauce (Oct 7, 2021)

Serge Forward said:


> And middle miggle. It's bloody menckul.


Might be a Yorkshire thing too, since Middleton in Leeds is often referred to as ‘Miggy’ by locals.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 7, 2021)

Dogsauce said:


> Might be a Yorkshire thing too, since Middleton in Leeds is often referred to as ‘Miggy’ by locals.


The Middleton in Greater Manc gets that as well.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Oct 7, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Why do Mancunians call hospital hospickle?


'They' don't.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 7, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> 'They' don't.



I’m not making it up. Maybe only some do.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 7, 2021)

The Manchester Evening News felt it worthy of discussion anyway. 









						Hospikle, areet, barm and nesh - the words people only say where you live
					

Forget the ‘Manc’ twang commonly associated with the Gallagher brothers; residents told researchers that it is stereotypical and not reflective of the rich tapestry of voices across the region




					www.google.co.uk


----------



## dessiato (Oct 7, 2021)

In Two Pints of Lager it was 'ospitickle was Gaz was taken in.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 7, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> The Manchester Evening News felt it worthy of discussion anyway.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Orsepickle is definitely a thing, along with lickle etc.  It's a working class thing, but somehow not universal even within an area or group of kids at a school say. A family thing to some degree?  I've always said 'I'm going to thi ospital' - I'm from Heywood, near Rochdale, so more Lancashire than Manchester.  Another thing I remember from some older people when I lived over there was 'pittles' instead of pickles.  No idea if that usage is still going or what it was all about, though it feels like an easier way for the tongue and palate to produce the word.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 7, 2021)

The guy I knew who said it was from Failsworth. Pretty sure that one from Moston did also but my memory fades. Manchester is a big place though.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Oct 7, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> I’m not making it up. Maybe only some do.


It's something you'd likely hear around Bolton.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 7, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> It's something you'd likely hear around Bolton.



Failsworth. Although I don’t know his history. Was someone I was close to when in Leeds for parts of my apprenticeship.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 7, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> The guy I knew who said it was from Failsworth. Pretty sure that one from Moston did also but my memory fades. Manchester is a big place though.


I'll be in Moston on Saturday, watching FC United.  If there's a 50/50 ball, I'll try it out: '_fucking 'ell, that was an orsepickle ball!'_


----------



## brogdale (Oct 7, 2021)

'Orsepiddle in Kent profunde


----------



## Wilf (Oct 7, 2021)

Oh, and it's _Man-chis-ter._


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 7, 2021)

Wilf said:


> I'll be in Moston on Saturday, watching FC United.  If there's a 50/50 ball, I'll try it out: '_fucking 'ell, that was an orsepickle ball!'_



I’ve heard of this team. Has links to activism?


----------



## Wilf (Oct 7, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> I’ve heard of this team. Has links to activism?


Yeah, they were formed as a response to the Glazer's takeover of Man United.  Fan owned and they do a fair number of community projects in the area.  




__





						Community | FC United of Manchester
					






					www.fc-utd.co.uk
				




The vibe is anti-corporate football. I've only just started going this year, so I'm not sure how much 'political' activism there is, as in antifa and the rest.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 7, 2021)

Wilf said:


> Yeah, they were formed as a response to the Glazer's takeover of Man United.  Fan owned and they do a fair number of community projects in the area.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I think they do food bank stuff etc but obviously attract activists rather than vice versa. But I don’t know much.


----------



## Part 2 (Oct 7, 2021)

Wilf said:


> Oh, and it's _Man-chis-toh_



fify

And I know more people who over exaggerate the T that use the CK. I don't think the CK applies to an area first time I heard it was in Wythenshawe but my mates family from Collyhurst all say it.


----------



## Serge Forward (Oct 7, 2021)

Glitter said:


> Ospickle.
> 
> H’s aren’t pronounced in Manchester


Though it sometimes has an 'n' in front of it, as in... a nospickle.


----------



## Serge Forward (Oct 7, 2021)

Wilf said:


> Yeah, they were formed as a response to the Glazer's takeover of Man United.  Fan owned and they do a fair number of community projects in the area.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I went regularly a few years back and was involved in the running of the club for a bit. Not had much involvement over the last few years though. Some really good people there, some dickheads though, too. It's worth being involved, just as long as you give any mither a swerve.


----------



## redcogs (Oct 7, 2021)

Mrs redcogs often thinks me an unreasonable person.. The frustration of reading the previous page and hoping for some insight into why the Saxe Coberg Gotha offspring isnae behind bars yet sort of confirms her view. Incidentally, she originated in Middleton (the Mancunian one) and is adamant that no-one refers to it as Miggy. However, i'm so unreasonable that i'm prepared to believe that she may be wrong. 😉


----------



## Serge Forward (Oct 7, 2021)

I've heard it called Miggy. Then again, maybe it's only the non Miggies who call it that.


----------



## Part 2 (Oct 7, 2021)

I bet it's more like Miggeh


----------



## William of Walworth (Oct 7, 2021)

Wilf said:


> I'll be in Moston on Saturday, *watching FC United*.


Maybe worth alerting moose to your presence!¬ Moose and Mr Moose will very likely be there!   

As won't Nonce Andrew


----------



## moose (Oct 7, 2021)

William of Walworth said:


> Maybe worth alerting moose to your presence!¬ Moose and Mr Moose will very likely be there!
> 
> As won't Nonce Andrew


Sorry, not been to a game since the start of the pandemic, and not ready to go back yet whilst COVID's still swilling about. And the thoughts of running a turnstile or working behind the bar seems like a distant dream now - I wouldn't want to touch that many people's money now


----------



## William of Walworth (Oct 7, 2021)

OK, I really understand that, and I hope prospects change for you all as time goes on 

I've been offered to accompany a local friend with his spare ticket for Swansea v Cardiff (the big Wales one!!   Coppers may be present!)
On Sunday 17th Oct. Ten  mins walk from where I live 
(Midday kick-off, obvs   ).

I'm not even a Swans fan, but I'd love to go, yet I'm dithering with my decision at the moment 

TV coverage in the pub in town may possibly happen instead  ...


----------



## William of Walworth (Oct 7, 2021)

As for Ponce Andrew, I suspect he might just have a few bigger issues to deal with!


----------



## Glitter (Oct 7, 2021)

Salford here. My Gran said ‘ospickle’, ‘miggle’, ‘meggle’ 



Wilf said:


> I'll be in Moston on Saturday, watching FC United.  If there's a 50/50 ball, I'll try it out: '_fucking 'ell, that was an orsepickle ball!'_



Have a top time. I haven’t been to Broadhurst Park. Had an ST for a good few years at Gigg Lane when we were there. I bloody loved it. 



Serge Forward said:


> I went regularly a few years back and was involved in the running of the club for a bit. Not had much involvement over the last few years though. Some really good people there, some dickheads though, too. It's worth being involved, just as long as you give any mither a swerve.



Hmmm, wondering if we know each other. Would put £20 on there being no more than 3 degrees of separation.


----------



## Serge Forward (Oct 7, 2021)

Probably. I was on the board for a while, terrible year of my life and really soured FC for me. Though much love to all the good eggs there.

Did your gran put keckle on?


----------



## Wilf (Oct 7, 2021)

Serge Forward said:


> Probably. I was on the board for a while, terrible year of my life and really soured FC for me. Though much love to all the good eggs there.
> 
> Did your gran put keckle on?


That year perhaps?








						FC United of Manchester: how the togetherness turned into disharmony
					

Moving into their own ground, Broadhurst Park, was a momentous moment for the Manchester United refuseniks but behind the scenes a club built on shared principles has been undermined by legal action, resignations and gagging orders




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Wilf (Oct 7, 2021)

moose said:


> Sorry, not been to a game since the start of the pandemic, and not ready to go back yet whilst COVID's still swilling about. And the thoughts of running a turnstile or working behind the bar seems like a distant dream now - I wouldn't want to touch that many people's money now


I was actually quite pleased covid wise at FC. I've seen them away at Morpeth and South shields as I live in the N/East and in both places the bar was rammed, with queues snaking back on themselves. By far the most covid risky thing I've done throughout. At FC they were pretty well spaced out bar queues.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 8, 2021)

Windsor had no friends on the Questiontime panel or audience tonight when the question of whether he should go to the US to face justice was raised. With the exception of Fiona Bruce who kept up an almost Tourette’s style repetition of “_of course Prince Andrew denies any wrongdoing...” _throughout the 5 mins discussion.


----------



## Serge Forward (Oct 8, 2021)

Wilf said:


> That year perhaps?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Round about that time. Fucking nightmare.


----------



## moose (Oct 8, 2021)

Serge Forward said:


> Round about that time. Fucking nightmare.


Never been the same since, IMO. But I guess it was to be expected.


----------



## Serge Forward (Oct 8, 2021)

Yeah, I went to a few games after. Saw some good mates there, but the love for the wider club had died a bit. Mind you, don't let my experiences put anyone off. FC is a wonderful thing. Just not for me these days.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 8, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Seems that mummy is bankrolling Andy's defence. It's a cracking look that, the monarch shelling out big bucks defending a child sex abuse case. Peak royalty.


TBF, her ancestors have form for it. One of Queen Victoria's boys was caught up in a vice ring involving juvenile telegram boys.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 8, 2021)

Flavour said:


> Can't wait for the Ghislaine Maxwell testimony, she should be able to see that DoY is low-hanging fruit. She might be able to get away with not implicating some of the other rich and powerful people for whom there is less evidence (and therefore potentially save her own life) if she gives up the juice on Andy


C'mon, Maxwell will lie thru her teeth about Windsor. She's like her dad - she'll suck up to anybody with a sniff of influence, & lie her arse off to do so.


----------



## ska invita (Oct 9, 2021)

are they trying to go after the accuser now?


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 10, 2021)

ska invita probably. Wouldn't be the first time.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 10, 2021)

The headline doesn't quite match the story though.  Story is more about them at least going through the motions of investigating him.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Oct 10, 2021)

ska invita said:


> are they trying to go after the accuser now?


If you look at the rest of the front page, maybe 'they' are people you shouldn't read?


----------



## andysays (Oct 11, 2021)

Wilf said:


> The headline doesn't quite match the story though.  Story is more about them at least going through the motions of investigating him.


Going through the motions is right (unsurprisingly)

Epstein: Met to take no further action after review​


> The Met previously ruled out opening an investigation into Epstein, but in August Metropolitan Police Commissioner Dame Cressida Dick said the force would review the decision. On Sunday, the Met said: "As a matter of procedure, MPS officers reviewed a document released in August 2021 as part of a US civil action. This review has concluded and we are taking no further action."


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 11, 2021)

andysays said:


> Going through the motions is right (unsurprisingly)
> 
> Epstein: Met to take no further action after review​



In August they said they will review their decision not to investigate and they have now done so and decided not to investigate. Tickety boo.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 11, 2021)

Will look good when Windsor settles the action with the monarch’s cash.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 11, 2021)

No one is above the law, said woman who got away with murder, not even someone who’s mum’s coat of arms graces the wall behind the head of every judge in the country. But we have decided to not even investigate.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Oct 11, 2021)

A continuation of the Met's appalling track record on mysogyny


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 11, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Will look good when Windsor settles the action with the monarch’s cash.


will look good when an american jury finds him guilty


----------



## brogdale (Oct 11, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> will look good when an american jury finds him guilty


...of a crime in London, amongst other locations.


----------



## tim (Oct 11, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> will look good when an american jury finds him guilty



It's a Civil case, so presumably there will be no jury.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 11, 2021)

gosub said:


> How is he still alive?
> 
> 
> Fucking claims "he's too honourable"......should have retire to his study with a Webley and a brandy long ago


I love the too honourable quote. Not a single person who watched it believed the nonce.


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 11, 2021)

tim said:


> It's a Civil case, so presumably there will be no jury.


Not necessarily. Depends on the state.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 11, 2021)

tim said:


> It's a Civil case, so presumably there will be no jury.


i think they have civil juries - the OJ case had one


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 11, 2021)

tim said:


> It's a Civil case, so presumably there will be no jury.


au contraire


----------



## dessiato (Oct 11, 2021)

TopCat said:


> I love the too honourable quote. Not a single person who watched it believed the nonce.


My sister did, and continues to do so.


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 11, 2021)

Even my father-in-law who might have been willing to cut him some slack and attach some weight to his word otherwise simply because he served in the Navy doesn't believe him.


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 11, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> Even my father-in-law who might have been willing to cut him some slack and attach some weight to his word otherwise simply because he served in the Navy doesn't believe him.


I daresay Brenda doesn't believe him either, seems to be only the Met that do. Or they can't be arsed and are doing the 'move along, nothing to see here' thing.


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 11, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> I daresay Brenda doesn't believe him either, seems to be only the Met that do. Or they can't be arsed and are doing the 'move along, nothing to see here' thing.


I don't think there is anything to see tbh, He Who Cannot Sweat has a done a truly magnificent job of convincing everyone he is a lying imbecile with a massive sense of his own entitlement but this is a 20 year old case that basically comes down to her word against his. I suspect not many in the Met believe him but there's just no evidence to prove he's a liar even though he has managed to convince huge numbers of people he is.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 11, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> I daresay Brenda doesn't believe him either, seems to be only the Met that do. Or they can't be arsed and are doing the 'move along, nothing to see here' thing.


when they sent the vice squad to chat to andrew many people believed they were police with an interest in prosecuting vice. sadly the opposite was true.


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 11, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> I don't think there is anything to see tbh, He Who Cannot Sweat has a done a truly magnificent job of convincing everyone he is a lying imbecile with a massive sense of his own entitlement but this is a 20 year old case that basically comes down to her word against his. I suspect not many in the Met believe him but there's just no evidence to prove he's a liar even though he has managed to convince huge numbers of people he is.


There is evidence. He claims he never met her. She has produced a photograph that proves that they did, at least once, at Maxwell's London townhouse. I believe the photograph has been authenticated.


----------



## Chilli.s (Oct 11, 2021)

Knowledge of intimate birthmarks, tattoo, piercing etc would be a fair indication that she met him.


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 11, 2021)

And given that she can prove he lied once, it throws everything he says into question.


----------



## Chilli.s (Oct 11, 2021)

Fingers crossed then


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 11, 2021)

He might even have a tragic walking accident whilst walking the clifftop near the Castle of Mey (furthest north coastal residence of the royals I can think of, although the QM may have passed it to Charles when she died).

Some kind of permanent solution to the problem is likely in his future...


----------



## gosub (Oct 11, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> He might even have a tragic walking accident whilst walking the clifftop near the Castle of Mey (furthest north coastal residence of the royals I can think of, although the QM may have passed it to Charles when she died).
> 
> Some kind of permanent solution to the problem is likely in his future...



It was a tragedy, falling off that cliff whilst trying to save those puppies.  Selfless to the end


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 11, 2021)

dessiato said:


> My sister did, and continues to do so.


Wow. I’ve never heard of anyone else who did.


----------



## 1927 (Oct 11, 2021)

tim said:


> It's a Civil case, so presumably there will be no jury.


there are juries in civil cases.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 11, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> He might even have a tragic walking accident whilst walking the clifftop near the Castle of Mey (furthest north coastal residence of the royals I can think of, although the QM may have passed it to Charles when she died).
> 
> Some kind of permanent solution to the problem is likely in his future...


charles has it


----------



## eatmorecheese (Oct 11, 2021)

dessiato said:


> My sister did, and continues to do so.


 So does Mrs Cheese's aunt. The crux of her argument is the idea that victims should come forward straight away, not years later. I told her that she fails to understand how abusive power dynamics, shame, blame etc works. She said it was all about money. I called him a dirty shithouse and we left the conversation there.


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 11, 2021)

eatmorecheese said:


> So does Mrs Cheese's aunt. The crux of her argument is the idea that victims should come forward straight away, not years later. I told her that she fails to understand how abusive power dynamics, shame, blame etc works. She said it was all about money. I called him a dirty shithouse and we left the conversation there.


Yeah, victims don't come forward for a whole variety of reasons.


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 11, 2021)

And I know a lot of people like Aunt Cheese think 'they should just go to the police', well, the rape conviction stats should make it clear why people avoid that route, never mind the lack of trust given recent events with Sarah Everard.


----------



## dessiato (Oct 11, 2021)

eatmorecheese said:


> So does Mrs Cheese's aunt. The crux of her argument is the idea that victims should come forward straight away, not years later. I told her that she fails to understand how abusive power dynamics, shame, blame etc works. She said it was all about money. I called him a dirty shithouse and we left the conversation there.


That's broadly the conversation with my sister.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 11, 2021)

Chilli.s said:


> Knowledge of intimate birthmarks, tattoo, piercing etc would be a fair indication that she met him.


Does Prince Andrew have a Prince Albert? 😳


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 11, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> There is evidence. He claims he never met her. She has produced a photograph that proves that they did, at least once, at Maxwell's London townhouse. I believe the photograph has been authenticated.


That's proof he has met her and he's lying about it, neither of which are unfortunately actual crimes. Doesn't prove he's slept with her and is nowhere near enough to build a case on if that is all there is.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 11, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> That's proof he has met her and he's lying about it, neither of which are unfortunately actual crimes. Doesn't prove he's slept with her and is nowhere near enough to build a case on if that is all there is.


i suppose he could just say in court that he couldn’t remember meeting her. He’d just say he meets so many people how could he possibly remember? I probably wouldn’t remember meeting one person in a club once a few years back. would you? (of course he does remember her though, having more than just met her)


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 11, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> That's proof he has met her and he's lying about it, neither of which are unfortunately actual crimes. Doesn't prove he's slept with her and is nowhere near enough to build a case on if that is all there is.


You said there was no proof he had lied. There is.


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 11, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> You said there was no proof he had lied. There is.


Yes you're right bad choice of words on my part I should have been a little clearer, During his magnificent car crash of an interview he claimed he had no idea where the photo came from, I didn't believe him and I'm sure you didn't.
However there is nothing to stop him repeating that under oath. He's a prince and meets a lot of people it is not reasonable to expect him to remember every single person he's posed with.
Even then what does the photo actually prove, that he has met Giuffre? The Met don't have to prove that or that he was lying about it since even if he is posing for a picture with someone isn't a crime. They have to prove HWCS slept with her against her will since she was coerced by Epstein. That's a crime but there is no evidence of that save her word. I believe her not him but the fact that someone has been caught out lying about one thing doesn't support any claim that something else has happened.
Plod has to prove her version of events after the photo (or before I can't remember whether she claimed they had sex after or before the photo was taken) and that his denials of that are false.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 11, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> They have to prove HWCS slept with her against her will since she was coerced by Epstein.


I _think_ they would only have to prove that she was trafficked, not that she was coerced on that specific occasion.


----------



## Athos (Oct 11, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> You said there was no proof he had lied. There is.


Is there? I thought he'd been very carful to say that he had "no recollection" of meeting her, rather than denying that he had?


----------



## gosub (Oct 11, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> Yes you're right bad choice of words on my part I should have been a little clearer, During his magnificent car crash of an interview he claimed he had no idea where the photo came from, I didn't believe him and I'm sure you didn't.
> However there is nothing to stop him repeating that under oath. He's a prince and meets a lot of people it is not reasonable to expect him to remember every single person he's posed with.
> Even then what does the photo actually prove, that he has met Giuffre? The Met don't have to prove that or that he was lying about it since even if he is posing for a picture with someone isn't a crime. They have to prove HWCS slept with her against her will since she was coerced by Epstein. That's a crime but there is no evidence of that save her word. I believe her not him but the fact that someone has been caught out lying about one thing doesn't support any claim that something else has happened.
> Plod has to prove her version of events after the photo (or before I can't remember whether she claimed they had sex after or before the photo was taken) and that his denials of that are false.



Shame he can't face trial in Scotland.  Can you imagine the tarnish to his honour a 'not proven' would bring


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 11, 2021)

gosub said:


> Shame he can't face trial in Scotland.  Can you imagine the tarnish to his honour a 'not proven' would bring


not as much of a tarnish as guilty on all counts


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 11, 2021)

Raheem said:


> I _think_ they would only have to prove that she was trafficked, not that she was coerced on that specific occasion.


They would still have to prove that he slept with her, I was kind of hoping that Epstein had been secretly recording stuff for later blackmail purposes and Maxwell would spill the beans but it looks like either he wasn't or she doesn't know where he kept it.


----------



## gosub (Oct 11, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> They would still have to prove that he slept with her, I was kind of hoping that Epstein had been secretly recording stuff for later blackmail purposes and Maxwell would spill the beans but it looks like either he wasn't or she doesn't know where he kept it.


John Mark Dougan.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 11, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> They would still have to prove that he slept with her, I was kind of hoping that Epstein had been secretly recording stuff for later blackmail purposes and Maxwell would spill the beans but it looks like either he wasn't or she doesn't know where he kept it.


Yeah, this. I’m really not sure what anyone would have expected the Met to do other than waste a load of time on something that won’t result in a prosecution in a million years. 

VG: “He had sex with me against my will 20 years ago”.
Met: “He says he didn’t, do you have any evidence?”
VG: “No”
Met: “Thanks for coming”. 

The fact that nobody believes the fucker is neither here nor there.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 11, 2021)

Athos said:


> Is there? I thought he'd been very carful to say that he had "no recollection" of meeting her, rather than denying that he had?




he did, and then went on to suggest the photo couldn't be legitimate as those were not clothes he ever wore in London* and he has never been upstairs in Maxwell's house.

* "I don't believe it's a picture of me in London because... when I go out in London, I wear a suit and a tie"

So this couldn't be in London





Which is odd as here he is outside Tramp in 2001...


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 11, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> i suppose he could just say in court that he couldn’t remember meeting her. He’d just say he meets so many people how could he possibly remember? I probably wouldn’t remember meeting one person in a club once a few years back. would you? (of course he does remember her though, having more than just met her)



I probably wouldn’t remember being in a pizza express on a particular date twenty years ago either.


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 11, 2021)

gosub said:


> John Mark Dougan.


Well that was a fun read but that guy has less credibility than Randy Andy himself which is saying something.


----------



## Athos (Oct 11, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> he did, and then went on to suggest the photo couldn't be legitimate as those were not clothes he ever wore in London* and he has never been upstairs in Maxwell's house.
> 
> * "I don't believe it's a picture of me in London because... when I go out in London, I wear a suit and a tie"
> 
> ...


So, given we've no way of knowing the authenticity of that photo, or where it was taken (whether it was in London or upstairs at Maxwell's house), the only provable lie is that he did go out without jacket and tie in London at least once?  Hardly damning. And very different from the idea that he lied about ever meeting her, which seemed to be what was being suggested. 

I mean, I believe her, but you can understand why the police don't have much to go (even if they wanted to, which I'm sure they don't), and even if what's she accusing him of was a crime in the UK at the time (which I'm still not sure about).

Unless there's some killer piece of evidence that's been held back to date e.g. a video recording taken for blackmail purposes, I just can't see him getting done for this, unfortunately.

Thankfully, most people know the score, and, even if he avoids a criminal prosecution and a finding against him in the US civil proceedings, he's never returning to public life.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 11, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> I probably wouldn’t remember being in a pizza express on a particular date twenty years ago either.


depends on the quality of the pizza


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 11, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> he did, and then went on to suggest the photo couldn't be legitimate as those were not clothes he ever wore in London* and he has never been upstairs in Maxwell's house.
> 
> * "I don't believe it's a picture of me in London because... when I go out in London, I wear a suit and a tie"
> 
> ...


we are all but bit players in the athos show


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 11, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> depends on the quality of the pizza


Pizza Express are nice but they're not that good


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 11, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> depends on the quality of the pizza



There was a decent Italian restaurant on Columbia Rd. I couldn’t tell you any date I was ever there though.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 11, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> There was a decent Italian restaurant on Columbia Rd. I couldn’t tell you any date I was ever there though.


that's a pity


----------



## Raheem (Oct 11, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> There was a decent Italian restaurant on Columbia Rd. I couldn’t tell you any date I was ever there though.


Even if you really really needed to?

Bet Google knows.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Oct 11, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> depends on the quality of the pizza


And whether or not you were using it for your alibi.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 11, 2021)

Raheem said:


> Even if you really really needed to?
> 
> Bet Google knows.



Pre smart phones.


----------



## Sue (Oct 11, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> There was a decent Italian restaurant on Columbia Rd. I couldn’t tell you any date I was ever there though.


Stingray Global or some such slightly strange name if you mean the pizza place? Think it's still there.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 11, 2021)

Sue said:


> Stingray Global or some such slightly strange name if you mean the pizza place? Think it's still there.



Yeah that’s the one I think.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 11, 2021)

Spymaster said:


> Yeah, this. I’m really not sure what anyone would have expected the Met to do other than waste a load of time on something that won’t result in a prosecution in a million years.
> 
> VG: “He had sex with me against my will 20 years ago”.
> Met: “He says he didn’t, do you have any evidence?”
> ...


And yet other jurisdictions (beyond the US) alleged to have been the locations of the Epstein/Maxwell trafficking and abuse have undertaken investigations.

The Met are the exception.

Revealed: Epstein and Maxwell implicated in multiple UK abuse claims over a decade


----------



## Sue (Oct 11, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Yeah that’s the one I think.


There was also one a bit further along but IIRC there was some issues with their rent being raised massively and them being under threat or something. That was a while ago mind.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 11, 2021)

Sue said:


> There was also one a bit further along but IIRC there was some issues with their rent being raised massively and them being under threat or something. That was a while ago mind.



Have just googled and yep, that’s the one I mean. Still looks the same almost 20 years later!


----------



## spitfire (Oct 11, 2021)

Was in there on Sunday last week and they have just repainted the walls but it has remained unchanged other than that since I've been here, 15 years +. It's our "cheap family night out" place. Pizza's for less than a tenner. In Hackney!


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 11, 2021)

brogdale said:


> And yet other jurisdictions (beyond the US) alleged to have been the locations of the Epstein/Maxwell trafficking and abuse have undertaken investigations.
> 
> The Met are the exception.
> 
> Revealed: Epstein and Maxwell implicated in multiple UK abuse claims over a decade


I would have expected a somewhat more thorough investigation including the taking of full, detailed witness statements and collection of any circumstantial evidence. 

What we do know is that Epstein had form for this type of thing and Andrew has been lying consistently since day 1 of being linked to Epstein and Maxwell. He's lied about so many aspects of this there's no way anyone could tell when he's being truthful. Yes I know that's not evidence.


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 11, 2021)

With the references to 2001 in the C4 article it does make me wonder if Virginia Guiffre has been making complaints about incidents in the UK for a very long time.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 11, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> With the references to 2001 in the C4 article it does make me wonder if Virginia Guiffre has been making complaints about incidents in the UK for a very long time.


I'm sure she has


----------



## tim (Oct 11, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> With the references to 2001 in the C4 article it does make me wonder if Virginia Guiffre has been making complaints about incidents in the UK for a very long time.


Since 2015, at least.

A complete timeline of Virginia Roberts Giuffre's sexual-assault accusations against Prince Andrew


----------



## DaveCinzano (Oct 11, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Which is odd as here he is outside Tramp in 2001...
> 
> View attachment 292318


Any invoices-by-the-guinea lawyer worth their salt would point out that judging by his pupils he is clearly and indubitably not_ going out_ but _coming back_, which is completely different m'lud.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 13, 2021)

Spymaster said:


> Yeah, this. I’m really not sure what anyone would have expected the Met to do other than waste a load of time on something that won’t result in a prosecution in a million years.
> 
> VG: “He had sex with me against my will 20 years ago”.
> Met: “He says he didn’t, do you have any evidence?”
> ...




Turns out the filth didn’t speak with her, the only people they spoke with was Andrew’s lawyers.


----------



## Athos (Oct 13, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Turns out the filth didn’t speak with her, the only people they spoke with was Andrew’s lawyers.


If that's true, it's bonkers.  You'd think that, if only for appearances sake, they'd go through the motions of speaking to her.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 13, 2021)

Athos said:


> If that's true, it's bonkers.  You'd think that, if only for appearances sake, they'd go through the motions of speaking to her.




Wayne Couzens' employer dropping a rape case having spoken with the accused's lawyers, odd one...

From the Scum: 
And his friends last night brazenly said it was “no surprise” the Met had dropped its review into sex abuse allegations for a third time.

Cops contacted Andrew’s £1,000-an-hour legal team after Met chief Dame Cressida Dick asked officers to review the case in August.

It is not known if they spoke to Andrew. But The Sun understands the Met did not quiz 38-year-old Ms Giuffre, now living in Australia.


----------



## JoeyBoy (Oct 13, 2021)

Wouldn't they have to go to Oz to interview her then?   I don't think the cops are very interested in trying to pin anything on him and are just going through the motions but is it worth sending a couple of them to Oz on a jolly when everyone knows nothing is going to come of it?


----------



## Athos (Oct 13, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Wayne Couzens' employer dropping a rape case having spoken with the accused's lawyers, odd one...
> 
> From the Scum:
> And his friends last night brazenly said it was “no surprise” the Met had dropped its review into sex abuse allegations for a third time.
> ...



That is odd given the other arm of Murdoch's UK press, The Times, claims they did speak to her.  Pretty shocking if they didn't, and surprising given their keenness to appear to take such issues seriously in the immediate aftermath of the Sarah Everard case.


----------



## Athos (Oct 13, 2021)

JoeyBoy said:


> Wouldn't they have to go to Oz to interview her then?   I don't think the cops are very interested in trying to pin anything on him and are just going through the motions but is it worth sending a couple of them to Oz on a jolly when everyone knows nothing is going to come of it?


They could at least have spoken to her over the phone (which is what The Times claims happened).


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 13, 2021)

Athos said:


> That is odd given the other arm of Murdoch's UK press, The Times, claims they did speak to her.  Pretty shocking if they didn't, and surprising given their keenness to appear to take such issues seriously in the immediate aftermath of the Sarah Everard case.



The Times did, after that the Sunday Times claimed they didn't, which is where the scum got it from.


----------



## JoeyBoy (Oct 13, 2021)

Athos said:


> They could at least have spoken to her over the phone (which is what The Times claims happened).


 I know I'm not in the same social class as Andrew but don't have they to speak to him with lawyers present rather than just speak to his lawyers? What if they want to ask him questions his lawyers don't know the answer to?
When I was arrested the cops made me come to the nick and wait whilst they dragged the duty brief out of his bed. I'm starting to think rich people get special treatment.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 13, 2021)

Don't be ridiculous


----------



## scalyboy (Oct 13, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Turns out the filth didn’t speak with her, the only people they spoke with was Andrew’s lawyers.


So to paraphrase Spymaster in his post #4443:

The Met: Some girl has accused your client HRH Sweaty Noncy of raping her, what's the score?

HRH Sweaty Noncy's brief: All lies, she's just making it up for fame and dosh

The Met: Alright then, cheers, sorry to have wasted your time
🤬


----------



## Athos (Oct 13, 2021)

JoeyBoy said:


> I know I'm not in the same social class as Andrew but don't have they to speak to him with lawyers present rather than just speak to his lawyers? What if they want to ask him questions his lawyers don't know the answer to?
> When I was arrested the cops made me come to the nick and wait whilst they dragged the duty brief out of his bed. I'm starting to think rich people get special treatment.


Most likely, yes.   Though I expect they'd claim there wasn't enough evidence to arrest him, but that they'd have liked him to come in for a voluntary interview, which would be arranged through his lawyers.


----------



## Athos (Oct 13, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The Times did, after that the Sunday Times claimed they didn't, which is where the scum got it from.


I get the feeling they're all just speculating. Hope she confirms if they NFAd it without even speaking to her.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 13, 2021)

Athos said:


> I get the feeling they're all just speculating. Hope she confirms if they NFAd it without even speaking to her.



Seem to be a fair few Old Bill who are quite pissed off about the whole thing, (and who can blame them, being asked to cover for such a blatant nonce), the rags' sources have been fairly reliable so far...


----------



## Wilf (Oct 13, 2021)

scalyboy said:


> So to paraphrase Spymaster in his post #4443:
> 
> The Met: Some girl has accused your client HRH Sweaty Noncy of raping her, what's the score?
> 
> ...


Entirely correct, though at £1000 an hour I doubt they were too fussed about having their time wasted.


----------



## Athos (Oct 13, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Seem to be a fair few Old Bill who are quite pissed off about the whole thing...


Well, they did swear an oath to the sweaty nonce's mum.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 13, 2021)

Most papers suggesting they didn't speak to Virginia Giuffre which, if true, makes the process an insult rather than a botched job.

Already seemed a bit odd as a process.  It was trailed as Cressida Dick calling for a 'review' of the previous decision, in light of evidence revealed in the American civil action (I think).  Not sure if it was intended to be an _administrative review_, essentially whether the paper clips in the right place in the file, or an _investigation_?  Speaking to the nonce's solicitors but not the victim's seems to be neither of the above.   Anyway, it's exactly what it is, a defence of privilege and a bit of juggling by the met to repackage their inaction.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 13, 2021)

I won't link to the mail, particularly as there's a picture of the nonce grinning away after the met decision. Anyway, here's a quote from the met:



> Met spokesman said last night: 'As a matter of procedure, MPS officers reviewed a document released in August 2021 as part of a US civil action. This review has concluded and we are taking no further action.'


Maybe I'm reading too much into this, but the scope of the 'review' seems to have narrowed since Dick announced it, with references to nobody being 'above the law'.  Now it's 'we had a quick sken at some document'.


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 13, 2021)

Wilf said:


> I won't link to the mail, particularly as there's a picture of the nonce grinning away after the met decision. Anyway, here's a quote from the met:
> 
> 
> Maybe I'm reading too much into this, but the scope of the 'review' seems to have narrowed since Dick announced it, with references to nobody being 'above the law'.  Now it's 'we had a quick sken at some document'.


Assuming they found the documents in the first place. I doubt they even poked never mind read them.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 13, 2021)

If there is/was to be a genuine reopening of the case and/or review, I'm not sure when the optimum time for that would be (when new evidence emerges? when there's evidence the original was badly conducted?).  In theory, the epstein agreement and things that might come out in the American civil action might provide grounds for further investigations over here.  There's a genuine element of dammed if you reopen it now, dammed if you leave it till after the US civil case.  But having said this, my guess is that the results of this latest 'review' will be used to justify further inaction _regardless _of what emerges in the US.  Holding the review was a cynical response to the Sarah Everard murder by one of their own, but timed to take place before further evidence is likely to come out.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 13, 2021)

Athos said:


> If that's true, it's bonkers.  You'd think that, if only for appearances sake, they'd go through the motions of speaking to her.


they went through the motions of making out they'd spoken to her


----------



## Athos (Oct 13, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> they went through the motions of making out they'd spoken to her


And seemingly fucked that up.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 13, 2021)

Athos said:


> And seemingly fucked that up.


i cannot conceive of a situation so dire that a copper couldn't fuck it up


----------



## Athos (Oct 13, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> i cannot conceive of a situation so dire that a copper couldn't fuck it up


Cover ups


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 13, 2021)

Athos said:


> Cover ups


cops will fuck those up too


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 13, 2021)

I once gave a witness statement to an assault as did my neighbour at the time. Obviously we both have our contact details. The copper either lost or wrote it down incorrectly because when they wanted to speak to her they would call my phone, even when she gave them her number again.

The whole thing was farcical - and that was something relatively minor.


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 13, 2021)

The most annoying thing was never dealing with the same person twice. I think out of all the police I spoke to, whether in person or on the phone, there was only one person who seemed to be competent.

The detective I spoke to several weeks after the initial incident certainly was not the sharpest tool, he repeated what the first person had told me then made he'd solved a one woman crime wave (she'd stolen a couple of wallets along the way to the assault) when the initial PC I had spoken to had collated all the information.

My unimpressedness did not go down well with him


----------



## TopCat (Oct 14, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> i cannot conceive of a situation so dire that a copper couldn't fuck it up


It’s been a constant source of amazement throughout my life this. When hope is seemingly lost and a cell beckons, the Met’s finest have fucked it up on the stand.


----------



## dessiato (Oct 14, 2021)

Talking of coppers fucking up.

My ex b-i-l was copper. In the early days of his career he was on duty one Xmas when a bloke came in and confessed to a murder. He was sent away, repeatedly. A few days later the body was found.

A woman I know was arrested for possession. As she was being taken to the cells a packet of heroin fell onto the floor. For some reason they didn't notice it, and later where unable to tie it directly to her. She was set free.


----------



## steveseagull (Oct 26, 2021)

Judge sets deadline for Prince Andrew's testimony in sex-assault case
					

Prince Andrew, who is accused of sexually abusing an American woman when she was a teenager, must make himself available to answer questions under oath by mid-July of next year, a judge in the US has ruled.




					www.lbc.co.uk


----------



## Chilli.s (Oct 26, 2021)

Plenty of time to get the servants drilled and statements agreed on.


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 26, 2021)

His plan to get it dismissed on a technicality doesn't seem to be working, he is going to have to go there and face it and risk losing or just flatly ignore it and presumably lose it by default. Even though I think there is zero risk if jail time, either of these are disastrous for his image and his chances of returning to public life.


----------



## dessiato (Oct 26, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> His plan to get it dismissed on a technicality doesn't seem to be working, he is going to have to go there and face it and risk losing or just flatly ignore it and presumably lose it by default. Even though I think there is zero risk if jail time, either of these are disastrous for his image and his chances of returning to public life.


What if he "wins?" I don't think he can escape with an untarnished reputation whatever the outcome. (I think, on the balance of probabilities, he did it.)


----------



## brogdale (Oct 26, 2021)

There was one good line in Frankie Boyle last night along the lines of....have you seen the Queen is paying Andrew's legal fees...so that's us paying...with our taxes...no wonder NI went up; nonce insurance!


----------



## steveseagull (Oct 26, 2021)

He is going to fuck up his mum's Jubilee isn't he?

Unless she carks it before then and Meghan Markle gets the blame.


----------



## dessiato (Oct 26, 2021)

steveseagull said:


> He is going to fuck up his mum's Jubilee isn't he?
> 
> Unless she carks it before then and Meghan Markle gets the blame.


Well it's Markle's fault anyway. It's what you'd expect from an American actress.


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 26, 2021)

Nearly 9 months to have a deposition taken? Ffs


----------



## Chilli.s (Oct 26, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> Nearly 9 months to have a deposition taken? Ffs


nice law if you can afford it


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 26, 2021)

Even if he does actually turn up for the deposition, chances are he won't answer any questions. Can he plead the 5th if it's a civil case?


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 26, 2021)

If he does succeed it getting the whole think kicked into touch by way of legal technicality do we get an extra bank holiday by means of thanks for financing it all?


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 26, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> Can he plead the 5th if it's a civil case?


Yes. Nobody can be compelled to give evidence that would criminally implicate them in any testimony. Inferences may be drawn from the refusal though.


----------



## andysays (Oct 26, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> Nearly 9 months to have a deposition taken? Ffs


It's not as if he has a busy schedule of public engagements that have to be accommodated...


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 26, 2021)

andysays said:


> It's not as if he has a busy schedule of public engagements that have to be accommodated...


And the grouse season is pretty much over, I think.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 26, 2021)

When is Maxwell in court?


----------



## belboid (Oct 26, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> And the grouse season is pretty much over, I think.


Dahling!  We're barely halfway through, August 12th to December 10th. Pheasants will take us through till the end of January when the poor chap will only have Red Deer to hunt until April. Finally he can then have a couple of months off (well, unless he has a fancy for a young muntjac or two), until the Red Stag season starts up in Scotland in July.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 26, 2021)

TopCat said:


> When is Maxwell in court?




Arse end of November. A nice alternative to I'm a Celebrity.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 26, 2021)

So months of headlines before he has to answer his charge. I bet the cunt says he can’t get a fair hearing due to his long but honourable friendship with the cow son.


----------



## two sheds (Oct 26, 2021)

I'm sorry but I don't remember. I'm sorry but I don't remember ....


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 26, 2021)




----------



## TopCat (Oct 26, 2021)

His arse must be fluttering a bit given the likely evidence in her case. Maybe being in esteemed company of other rapists makes him feel safer.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 26, 2021)

Chilli.s said:


> Plenty of time to get the servants drilled and statements agreed on.


'Oh yes, your honour, my prince definitely likes pizza... and driving to places where pizza can be found... in secret...   and keeping that drive off the royal protection logs. And on days when he does that, he finds little time for nightclub visits much later in the day'.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 26, 2021)

TopCat said:


> His arse must be fluttering a bit given the likely evidence in her case. Maybe being in esteemed company of other rapists makes him feel safer.


yes, i imagine his protection officers will be in the court with him


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 26, 2021)

The Royal protection officers he has now are not likely to be the same ones he had 20 years ago which means that Giuffre's lawyers will have to pay someone to track them down and they might very well just refuse to co-operate, doubt they could be forced to. As for whatever logs that might exist (if they still do) then assuming the Met hands them over what are they likely to say? 
'11:10 PC Bloggs and I sat in the car and had our sandwiches while HRH went upstairs  and got his leg over with the teenage girl that the creepy Yank set him up with'
Lots of people (Inc me) are getting their hopes up there will be some big reveal that will show him up for what he is but it seems to be that everything is just going to be endless insinuation.


----------



## Athos (Oct 26, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> The Royal protection officers he has now are not likely to be the same ones he had 20 years ago which means that Giuffre's lawyers will have to pay someone to track them down and they might very well just refuse to co-operate, doubt they could be forced to. As for whatever logs that might exist (if they still do) then assuming the Met hands them over what are they likely to say?
> '11:10 PC Bloggs and I sat in the car and had our sandwiches while HRH went upstairs  and got his leg over with the teenage girl that the creepy Yank set him up with'
> Lots of people (Inc me) are getting their hopes up there will be some big reveal that will show him up for what he is but it seems to be that everything is just going to be endless insinuation.


I doubt they'd still have them (why would they?), but, even if they did, I doubt they'd be provided (by fair means or foul), and, even if they were, what would they show that would be killer evidence?  Even if he wasn't at Pizza Express and was at Maxwell's house, it'd be far short of the evidence required.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 26, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> The Royal protection officers he has now are not likely to be the same ones he had 20 years ago which means that Giuffre's lawyers will have to pay someone to track them down and they might very well just refuse to co-operate, doubt they could be forced to. As for whatever logs that might exist (if they still do) then assuming the Met hands them over what are they likely to say?
> '11:10 PC Bloggs and I sat in the car and had our sandwiches while HRH went upstairs  and got his leg over with the teenage girl that the creepy Yank set him up with'
> Lots of people (Inc me) are getting their hopes up there will be some big reveal that will show him up for what he is but it seems to be that everything is just going to be endless insinuation.


ONe particular protection officer broke cover a couple of years ago and called for the logs, iirc.  Don't remember it going anywhere.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 26, 2021)

Athos said:


> I doubt they'd still have them (why would they?), but, even if they did, I doubt they'd be provided (by fair means or foul), and, even if they were, what would they show that would be killer evidence - even if he wasn't at Pizza Express and was at Maxwell's house, it'd be far short of the evidence required.


Given that they, kind of, record the movements and doings of the royals, my pure guess is that they _are _kept in some filing cabinet somewhere.  However, as you say they wouldn't add up to killer evidence on her side, just potential proof that he was lying or had 'misremembered' the events of that day.  Put the other way round though, if he was telling the truth, at least about the pizza express visit, you'd think he'd be calling for the logs to back up that bit of his story.  I think it's a fair guess his lawyers will have talked to the met or whoever runs the royal protection lot to see what records exist.  They'll be confident the met are planning to keep out of this.


----------



## Athos (Oct 26, 2021)

Wilf said:


> Given that they, kind of, record the movements and doings of the royals, my pure guess is that they _are _kept in some filing cabinet somewhere.  However, as you say they wouldn't add up to killer evidence on her side, just potential proof that he was lying or had 'misremembered' the events of that day.  Put the other way round though, if he was telling the truth, at least about the pizza express visit, you'd think he'd be calling for the logs to back up that bit of his story.  I think it's a fair guess his lawyers will have talked to the met or whoever runs the royal protection lot to see what records exist.  They'll be confident the met are planning to keep out of this.


Yeah, can't imagine him proffering that alibi if there was a chance of contemporaneous documents proving it to be false.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 26, 2021)

Athos said:


> I doubt they'd still have them (why would they?), but, even if they did, I doubt they'd be provided (by fair means or foul), and, even if they were, what would they show that would be killer evidence?  Even if he wasn't at Pizza Express and was at Maxwell's house,*it'd be far short of the evidence required*.



Required to secure a prosecution in court.

In the court of public opinion though the jury is majority against him and as his worming continues it creeps towards a unanimous verdict. Seeing as the whole sorry house of cards comes tumbling down once the lickspittles and brown-nosers withdraw their support I am wholly in favour of the current state of play.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 26, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Required to secure a prosecution in court.
> 
> In the court of public opinion though the jury is majority against him and as his worming continues it creeps towards a majority verdict. Seeing as the whole sorry house of cards comes tumbling down once the lickspittles and brown-nosers withdraw their support I am wholly in favour of the current state of play.


all that is needed to hasten the wretched man's demise is to install ole gunnar solskjaer in a management role within his entourage, if the cabal of panders and pimps i believe congregate about him can be described as an entourage


----------



## TopCat (Oct 26, 2021)

His attempts to brazen it out are really covering the whole edifice in shit.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 26, 2021)

TopCat said:


> His attempts to brazen it out are really covering the whole edifice in shit.


yeh it's great


----------



## Chilli.s (Oct 26, 2021)

TopCat said:


> His attempts to brazen it out are really covering the whole edifice in shit.


a golden lining


----------



## TopCat (Oct 26, 2021)

There is no plan B either. He brazens it out or loses. 
It will be a few segments of cheer in the next rather bleak looking year.


----------



## redcogs (Oct 26, 2021)

Does all this mean he won't be our next king?


----------



## Chilli.s (Oct 26, 2021)

redcogs said:


> Does all this mean he won't be our next king?


Imagine kneeling down to get yer knighthood


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 26, 2021)




----------



## TopCat (Oct 26, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> The Royal protection officers he has now are not likely to be the same ones he had 20 years ago which means that Giuffre's lawyers will have to pay someone to track them down and they might very well just refuse to co-operate, doubt they could be forced to. As for whatever logs that might exist (if they still do) then assuming the Met hands them over what are they likely to say?
> '11:10 PC Bloggs and I sat in the car and had our sandwiches while HRH went upstairs  and got his leg over with the teenage girl that the creepy Yank set him up with'
> Lots of people (Inc me) are getting their hopes up there will be some big reveal that will show him up for what he is but it seems to be that everything is just going to be endless insinuation.


If Maxwell points the finger at him that will be compelling evidence. She may claim coercion from her dead ex and a difficult upbringing etc and throw shit about.


----------



## Athos (Oct 26, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Required to secure a prosecution in court.
> 
> In the court of public opinion though the jury is majority against him and as his worming continues it creeps towards a unanimous verdict. Seeing as the whole sorry house of cards comes tumbling down once the lickspittles and brown-nosers withdraw their support I am wholly in favour of the current state of play.


That so long-since sailed!


----------



## mx wcfc (Oct 26, 2021)

TopCat said:


> If Maxwell points the finger at him that will be compelling evidence.


I really, really, really hope she does.  Plea bargaining?


----------



## TopCat (Oct 26, 2021)

mx wcfc said:


> I really, really, really hope she does.  Plea bargaining?


Her legal approach has been “you can’t do this to me”. Once that’s finally thrown out she will have to choose to throw shit or choose prison for her always.


----------



## redcogs (Oct 26, 2021)

TopCat said:


> Once that’s finally thrown out she will have to choose to throw shit or choose prison for her always.



This might be worth crowdfunding


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 26, 2021)

TopCat said:


> If Maxwell points the finger at him that will be compelling evidence. She may claim coercion from her dead ex and a difficult upbringing etc and throw shit about.


Maxwell needs to do more than point the finger she needs to be able to provide hard evidence that would stand up in a criminal  trial and I think if she had that she would have cut a deal by now otherwise anything she says is still just insinuation no matter how many people believe her.


----------



## scalyboy (Oct 26, 2021)

Spymaster said:


> Yes. Nobody can be compelled to give evidence that would criminally implicate them in any testimony. Inferences may be drawn from the refusal though.


Hopefully it will be filmed, and someone with a YouTube channel can edit and intercut the footage with clips of other eminent persons pleading the fifth (first 70 seconds)


----------



## TopCat (Oct 27, 2021)

Prince Andrew’s lawyer asks to keep 2009 legal agreement sealed
					

Attorney says the deal can protect the prince against a lawsuit that claims that he assaulted Virginia Giuffre when she was 17




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## ruffneck23 (Oct 27, 2021)

TopCat said:


> Prince Andrew’s lawyer asks to keep 2009 legal agreement sealed
> 
> 
> Attorney says the deal can protect the prince against a lawsuit that claims that he assaulted Virginia Giuffre when she was 17
> ...


I hope they tell his lawyers to fuck off.


----------



## xenon (Oct 27, 2021)

So he’s reduced to magical thinking.  that is quite pathetic.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 27, 2021)

and such a good look.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 27, 2021)

Can I get this straight please? He wanted to have the agreement unsealed as he thought it would help his case, her lawyers agreed and it was, now they want to keep the details secret but still feel it gets him off the hook? Fuck that, there's some filthy linen in there needs airing.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 27, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Can I get this straight please? He wanted to have the agreement unsealed as he thought it would help his case, her lawyers agreed and it was, now they want to keep the details secret but still feel it gets him off the hook? Fuck that, there's some filthy linen in there needs airing.


He shat the bed when he saw what was in the document


----------



## DaveCinzano (Oct 27, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> He shat the bed when he saw what was in the document


Evidentiary Droste


----------



## Athos (Oct 27, 2021)

I think he's saying he wants to rely on it, but that he can only do so under seal in these proceedings because it's subject to a protective order against disclosure in the Epstein proceedings.  But given Epstein is dead and the parties in this case claim not to want it to remain under seal, the simplest thing would be for an order in the other proceedings lifting the protective order, and getting it all out in the open.


----------



## xenon (Oct 27, 2021)

I read it as a ridiculous three-year-olds logic. I am rich because there is £1 million in this box, which I haven’t opened. You can’t open it either. I am very rich.


----------



## andysays (Oct 27, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Can I get this straight please? He wanted to have the agreement unsealed as he thought it would help his case, her lawyers agreed and it was, now they want to keep the details secret but still feel it gets him off the hook? Fuck that, there's some filthy linen in there needs airing.


Maybe it says something like "and I promise not to sue Prince Andrew for that time he fucked me when I was 17".

I don’t claim to understand the legal niceties, but surely even the fact that his name is included in the agreement would demonstrate that he's an utter wrong 'un and is guilty of something quite serious, whether or not it's possible for him to actually be sued.

And if his name isn't included, I don't see how he can claim it provides him any legal protection.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Oct 27, 2021)

andysays said:


> Maybe it says something like "and I promise not to sue Prince Andrew for that time he fucked me when I was 17".
> 
> I don’t claim to understand the legal niceties, but surely even the fact that his name is included in the agreement would demonstrate that he's an utter wrong 'un and is guilty of something quite serious, whether or not it's possible for him to actually be sued.
> 
> And if his name isn't included, I don't see how he can claim it provides him any legal protection.


The agreement might include any other parties involved, without specifically naming them.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 27, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> The agreement might include any other parties involved, without specifically naming them.




AFAIK it mentions legal representatives, which is how Dershowitz wormed out of it.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Oct 27, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> AFAIK it mentions legal representatives, which is how Dershowitz wormed out of it.


Epstein was careful to include a free pass for any fellow nonces in his sweetheart deal in Florida. It's how Maxwell got away with it for so long. I reckon this one might be worded similar, although I don't recall the exact wording on the Florida deal but I'm pretty sure it let all involved nonces off the hook.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 27, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> The agreement might include any other parties involved, without specifically naming them.


There may be a clause “and indemnify all the men who raped me”.


----------



## two sheds (Oct 27, 2021)

xenon said:


> I read it as a ridiculous three-year-olds logic. I am rich because there is £1 million in this box, which I haven’t opened. You can’t open it either. I am very rich.


Are you on Trump's legal team by any chance?


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Oct 27, 2021)

xenon said:


> I read it as a ridiculous three-year-olds logic. I am rich because there is £1 million in this box, which I haven’t opened. You can’t open it either. I am very rich.



As long as the box remains closed he is simultaneously both a nonce and not a nonce.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Oct 27, 2021)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> As long as the box remains closed he is simultaneously both a nonce and not a nonce.


Schrödinger's nonce.


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 27, 2021)

I don't think these lawyers actually know what's in the magic box, they're simultaneously hoping there is a get out of jail free card whilst worrying that there is killer evidence that will damn He Who Cannot Sweat.
They want a secret peek whilst denying it to everyone else.


----------



## andysays (Oct 27, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> Epstein was careful to include a free pass for any fellow nonces in his sweetheart deal in Florida. It's how Maxwell got away with it for so long. I reckon this one might be worded similar, although I don't recall the exact wording on the Florida deal but I'm pretty sure it let all involved nonces off the hook.


As I said before, I don't understand the legal niceties, but in reputational terms, claiming the protection of a clause which lets all involved nonces off the hook doesn't seem that great a strategy.


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 27, 2021)

TopCat said:


> There may be a clause “and indemnify all the men who raped me”.


Correct terminology would be 'indemnify and hold harmless all the men who raped me' in the US, the 'hold harmless' being incredibly ironic here.


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 27, 2021)

There won't be such a clause.


andysays said:


> As I said before, I don't understand the legal niceties, but in reputational terms, claiming the protection of a clause which lets all involved nonces off the hook doesn't seem that great a strategy.


----------



## 1927 (Oct 27, 2021)

TopCat said:


> There may be a clause “and indemnify all the men who raped me”.


This was inferred weeks ago by her lawyer, who basically said to rely on it he’d have to admit he was guilty.


----------



## scalyboy (Oct 27, 2021)

Whatever happens, and if (as would seem to me to be likely) he avoids any official censure or punishment, the stench of unanswered allegations and well-founded suspicion will haunt him indefinitely. 

There’s too much - his undeniable friendship with Epstein, the photo with his arm round a teenage Giuffre’s waist, his astonishing car crash of a TV interview - all this will surely mean his reputation will be permanently in tatters.

Like Michael Barrymore (possibly an unfair comparison) and Fatty Arbuckle, he’ll never work again. Ah, hmm, ‘work’ doesn’t really apply in his case - but you know what I mean …


----------



## Athos (Oct 27, 2021)

I'm guessing the agreement with Epstein would've been worded along the lines of '... in full and final settlement of this and any future claims against Epstein and/or any other person, arising from or relating to the facts alleged by Guiffre in these proceedings.'  It'd then be a matter for the court to decide whether that wording encompasses the subject matter of the current claim.  The Sweatless One might be able to avail himself of it without admitting anything, on purely procedural grounds.  The 'optics' would be awful, but, to be honest, they already are; from his perspective, at least it'd protect him financially, not open him up to US criminal proceedings, and allow him to avoid some pretty uncomfortable questioning.  If it fails, he can still argue a jurisdiction point. After that, he'll have little choice but to ignore proceedings and allow judgement in default, and fight any attempt at enforcement in the UK.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 27, 2021)

scalyboy said:


> Whatever happens, and if (as would seem to me to be likely) he avoids any official censure or punishment, the stench of unanswered allegations and well-founded suspicion will haunt him indefinitely.
> 
> There’s too much - his undeniable friendship with Epstein, the photo with his arm round a teenage Giuffre’s waist, his astonishing car crash of a TV interview - all this will surely mean his reputation will be permanently in tatters.
> 
> Like Michael Barrymore (possibly an unfair comparison) and Fatty Arbuckle, he’ll never work again. Ah, hmm, ‘work’ doesn’t really apply in his case - but you know what I mean …


Unlike Prince Andrew Arbuckle was acquitted


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Oct 27, 2021)

scalyboy said:


> Whatever happens, and if (as would seem to me to be likely) he avoids any official censure or punishment, the stench of unanswered allegations and well-founded suspicion will haunt him indefinitely.
> 
> There’s too much - his undeniable friendship with Epstein, the photo with his arm round a teenage Giuffre’s waist, his astonishing car crash of a TV interview - all this will surely mean his reputation will be permanently in tatters.
> 
> Like Michael Barrymore (possibly an unfair comparison) and Fatty Arbuckle, he’ll never work again. Ah, hmm, ‘work’ doesn’t really apply in his case - but you know what I mean …



Yes, but he'll continue to live in unimaginable luxury, so will he care about "work"?


----------



## scalyboy (Oct 27, 2021)

ElizabethofYork said:


> Yes, but he'll continue to live in unimaginable luxury, so will he care about "work"?


Yes that’s what I was hinting at. He’s never worked, not in the sense that we understand it! I guess what might have an impact on the remainder of his miserable life is whether he’ll be shunned by former chums, will he still be able to invite enough people to a shooting or a dinner party, or will they all be ‘busy’?


----------



## andysays (Oct 27, 2021)

He'll never be able to go to Pizza Express in Woking again, though maybe they'll deliver


----------



## scalyboy (Oct 27, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> Unlike Prince Andrew Arbuckle was acquitted


That’s true, but his reputation was still irretrievably besmirched thereafter. Rather like Jeremy Thorpe’s. Sometimes a not guilty verdict doesn’t alleviate lingering suspicion and doubt on the part of the public.

John Bindon’s 1978 trial and acquittal for murder in theory might not have harmed him - partly because it was a set-to among villains and not ‘civilians’, and partly because it bolstered his hard man image.

But in practice TV & film directors & producers began dropping him as he was seen as too unpredictable and dangerous. Was Quadrophenia (1979) his final film?


----------



## dessiato (Oct 27, 2021)

scalyboy said:


> Yes that’s what I was hinting at. He’s never worked, not in the sense that we understand it! I guess what might have an impact on the remainder of his miserable life is whether he’ll be shunned by former chums, will he still be able to invite enough people to a shooting or a dinner party, or will they all be ‘busy’?


He was in the Navy, and served in the Falklands. As much as I condemn him for his life after that, he did serve, and merits recognition for that at least.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 27, 2021)

dessiato said:


> He was in the Navy, and served in the Falklands. As much as I condemn him for his life after that, he did serve, and merits recognition for that at least.



I always regard the modern monarchy ‘serving’ as a bit of theatre. I could be wrong but it fits with most of the rest that they do.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 27, 2021)

scalyboy said:


> That’s true, but his reputation was still irretrievably besmirched thereafter. Rather like Jeremy Thorpe’s. Sometimes a not guilty verdict doesn’t alleviate lingering suspicion and doubt on the part of the public.
> 
> John Bindon’s 1978 trial and acquittal for murder in theory might not have harmed him (partly because it was a set-to among villains and not ‘civilians’, and partly because it bolstered his hard man image.
> 
> But in practice TV & film directors & producers began dropping him as he was seen as too unpredictable and dangerous. Was Quadrophenia (1979) his final film?



Funny you should mention Bindon, as he was having it away with Andy's Aunt Margaret in Mustique. By all accounts he could hang five half-pint glasses from his cock.


----------



## dessiato (Oct 27, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> I always regard the modern monarchy ‘serving’ as a bit of theatre. I could be wrong but it fits with most of the rest that they do.


He signed up for 12 years, he got his Marines green beret, flew as a helicopter pilot and instructor, and as the captain of a warship. During the Falklands War, he flew on multiple missions including anti-surface warfare, Exocet missile decoy, and casualty evacuation. For this he, as anyone who did the same, deserves respect. Pity he has done nothing but become a nonce since.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 27, 2021)

dessiato said:


> He signed up for 12 years, he got his Marines green beret, flew as a helicopter pilot and instructor, and as the captain of a warship. During the Falklands War, he flew on multiple missions including anti-surface warfare, Exocet missile decoy, and casualty evacuation. For this he, as anyone who did the same, deserves respect. Pity he has done nothing but become a nonce since.



He obviously seriously engaged in the Falklands as his experience left him unable to sweat which is most probably a life threatening condition.
And all those medals.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 27, 2021)

Fuck knows how he became UK Special Ambassador spending time closer to the equator than anyone with a body unable to cool itself ought to. 🤷‍♂️ 🤷‍♂️ 🤷‍♂️


----------



## dessiato (Oct 27, 2021)

Please don't get me wrong, I think serving in the Falklands deserves recognition, but I do not agree/accept/justify any of his behaviour since, and especially not this.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 27, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> I always regard the modern monarchy ‘serving’ as a bit of theatre. I could be wrong but it fits with most of the rest that they do.


I'll(maybe slightly)  let Harry off with that serving shite  because he actually went on Oprah and said his literal  family are a bunch of wankers (for what that was worth, not much but it was something)

But the rest of them can fuck off with that haha


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 27, 2021)

dessiato said:


> Please don't get me wrong, I think serving in the Falklands deserves recognition, but I do not agree/accept/justify any of his behaviour since, and especially not this.


Here it comes 

"You served in the Falklands!" 

/ends


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 27, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Fuck knows how he became UK Special Ambassador spending time closer to the equator than anyone with a body unable to cool itself ought to. 🤷‍♂️ 🤷‍♂️ 🤷‍♂️


The logical extension is to make him spend more time near the poles in the Arctic and Antarctic, namely a one way ticket to the pengo plant in grytviken


----------



## Saul Goodman (Oct 27, 2021)

dessiato said:


> Exocet missile decoy


Shame he wasn't better at this.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 27, 2021)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Here it comes
> 
> "You served in the Falklands!"
> 
> /ends


Not sure they ever actually let him on the Falklands, there were after all children there


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 27, 2021)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I'll(maybe slightly)  let Harry off with that serving shite  because he actually went on Oprah and said his literal  family are a bunch of wankers (for what that was worth, not much but it was something)
> 
> But the rest of them can fuck off with that haha



But it’s all bollocks isn’t it? The rest of the time they’re shadowed by protection teams so the idea that they were ever seriously put at risk at war induces mirth.


----------



## dessiato (Oct 27, 2021)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Here it comes
> 
> "You served in the Falklands!"
> 
> /ends


Not sure what you're trying to say here.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 27, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> Not sure they ever actually let him on the Falklands, there were after all children there


I've considered every likely scenario here and he's a cunt in all of them.

HTH


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 27, 2021)

dessiato said:


> Not sure what you're trying to say here.


That's as much recognition as I'm prepared to give him.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 27, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> But it’s all bollocks isn’t it? The rest of the time they’re shadowed by protection teams so the idea that they were ever seriously put at risk at war induces mirth.


I know, I totally agree, that was sort of my point. I just wanted to give Harry half a point for being a tryer.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 27, 2021)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I know, I totally agree, that was sort of my point. I just wanted to give Harry half a point for being a tryer.


Adding to that- British military on their adventures isn't something I feel like applauding anyway


----------



## scalyboy (Oct 27, 2021)

dessiato said:


> He signed up for 12 years, he got his Marines green beret, flew as a helicopter pilot and instructor, and as the captain of a warship. During the Falklands War, he flew on multiple missions including anti-surface warfare, Exocet missile decoy, and casualty evacuation. For this he, as anyone who did the same, deserves respect. Pity he has done nothing but become a nonce since.


Fair enough. I didn’t realise he actually saw active service, flying missions etc. I suppose Harry has done active service too, was it in Afghanistan or Iraq? I would imagine they tried to keep him out of harms way tho


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 27, 2021)

scalyboy said:


> Fair enough. I didn’t realise he actually saw active service, flying missions etc. I suppose Harry has done active service too, was it in Afghanistan or Iraq? I would imagine they tried to keep him out of harms way tho


There was quite a lot of uproar about it at the time, I think he was the first Royal to see proper active service for a long time.


----------



## scalyboy (Oct 27, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> Not sure they ever actually let him on the Falklands, there were after all children there


And all those penguins. Will he get that close to the people’s beaked avengers again ? It would be good to think so


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 27, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> The logical extension is to make him spend more time near the poles in the Arctic and Antarctic, namely a one way ticket to the pengo plant in grytviken





scalyboy said:


> And all those penguins. Will he get that close to the people’s beaked avengers again ? It would be good to think so


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 27, 2021)

.


----------



## scalyboy (Oct 27, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Funny you should mention Bindon, as he was having it away with Andy's Aunt Margaret in Mustique. By all accounts he could hand five half-pint glasses from his cock.


And the Operation Julie raid was delayed for 24 hours so that a person close to Margaret who was in the vicinity could get away and wouldn’t be busted with thousands of tabs of high quality acid destined for Mustique. Allegedly


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 27, 2021)

dessiato said:


> Not sure what you're trying to say here.



Basically, that it's not worth mentioning.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 27, 2021)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Adding to that- British military on their adventures isn't something I feel like applauding anyway



It's mad that there's so much to say that ignoring his participation in Imperialist manoeuvres almost becomes a non point (or one that Dessatio cheers).


----------



## 1927 (Oct 27, 2021)

dessiato said:


> He was in the Navy, and served in the Falklands. As much as I condemn him for his life after that, he did serve, and merits recognition for that at least.


I’d have sworn that was a post from Sasaferrato! 🤔


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 27, 2021)

dessiato said:


> He signed up for 12 years, he got his Marines green beret, flew as a helicopter pilot and instructor, and as the captain of a warship. During the Falklands War, he flew on multiple missions including anti-surface warfare, Exocet missile decoy, and casualty evacuation. For this he, as anyone who did the same, deserves respect. Pity he has done nothing but become a nonce since.


What’s admirable about serving in a stupid unnecessary war?


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 27, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> What’s admirable about serving in a stupid unnecessary war?



Here we go


----------



## brogdale (Oct 27, 2021)

Nah, that was the Miners' strike.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 27, 2021)

Spymaster said:


> Here we go


Volunteering to go shoot a bunch of freezing frightened teenage conscripts is not something to be praising anyone for, especially a sweaty nonce.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 27, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> What’s admirable about serving in a stupid unnecessary war?



Yeah, let's just let any country get away with invading any territories they want too.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 27, 2021)

cupid_stunt said:


> Yeah, let's just let any country get away with invading any territories they want too.


In this case, yes, let’s


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 27, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> Volunteering to go shoot a bunch of freezing frightened teenage conscripts is not something to be praising anyone for ...


Yep. Condemn the kids who went to fight the invaders, not the dictator who caused the invasion. Twit.


----------



## Aladdin (Oct 27, 2021)

cupid_stunt said:


> Yeah, let's just let any country get away with invading any territories they want too.



But...

Pot

Kettle 

Etc etc


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 27, 2021)

Sugar Kane said:


> But...
> 
> Pot
> 
> ...



Don't confuse what happened a hundred or so years, that's history, to how the modern world should work,


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 27, 2021)

The trolls are out lol


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 27, 2021)

cupid_stunt said:


> Don't confuse what happened a hundred or so years, that's history, to how the modern world should work,


According to you


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 27, 2021)

Spymaster said:


> Yep. Condemn the kids who went to fight the invaders, not the dictator who caused the invasion. Twit.


I wasn’t condemning those kids, just Prince Nonce


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 27, 2021)

Let's not slag off the army. Without them, who would have stopped the Taliban?


----------



## Aladdin (Oct 27, 2021)

cupid_stunt said:


> Don't confuse what happened a hundred or so years, that's history, to how the modern world should work,



Eh? 

I really dont get that. I mean didnt the British take over the Falklands in 1750 or something? Like they did many other places? 

And they placed a naval / military base there presumably for some strategic advantage


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 27, 2021)

Sugar Kane said:


> Eh?
> 
> I really dont get that. I mean didnt the British take over the Falklands in 1750 or something? Like they did many other places?
> 
> And they placed a naval / military base there presumably for some strategic advantage



And the oil reserves. Shame that's going out of vogue now. Perhaps they'll occupy Greenland?


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 27, 2021)

cupid_stunt said:


> Don't confuse what happened a hundred or so years, that's history, to how the modern world should work,


Yeah it's a hundred years or so ago since they last invaded anyone. Except for Iraq twice, Afghanistan and probably a few more I've forgotten. But I think they were bombed for their own good or something.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 27, 2021)

Sugar Kane said:


> Eh?
> 
> I really dont get that. I mean didnt the British take over the Falklands in 1750 or something? Like they did many other places?
> 
> And they placed a naval / military base there presumably for some strategic advantage



The important thing is the people of the Falklands want to be under the protection of the UK, not a foreign invading force.

Much like the north of Ireland, until there's a vote on a united Ireland, which I support, it can't happen, and certainly not by force.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 27, 2021)

Obvious troll is obvious.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 27, 2021)

Sugar Kane said:


> I really dont get that. I mean didnt the British take over the Falklands in 1750 or something?



Inaccurate.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 27, 2021)

Tbf The British did introduce a functioning transport and mail system there for the sheep to use.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 27, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Tbf The British did introduce a functioning transport and mail system there for the sheep to use.


----------



## Aladdin (Oct 27, 2021)

Spymaster said:


> Inaccurate.




First claimed by Britain in 1765, then....like they claimed lots of places
 They just met no resistamce because it was not inhabited at the time by Argentinians or anyone else.


----------



## Aladdin (Oct 27, 2021)

cupid_stunt said:


> The important thing is the people of the Falklands want to be under the protection of the UK, not a foreign invading force.
> 
> Much like the north of Ireland, until there's a vote on a united Ireland, which I support, it can't happen, and certainly not by force.




The people were Navy / military personnel...surely? And are there for strategic reasons. The fact they have created families is beside the point...
It's not like they settled there. They were PUT there and dont forget that the Spanish and French were also there. The Brits fought them for the bits of islands they had occupied.

The policy of the British Empire was to move people to different parts of the empire. And they posted troops / navy etc there. Just to keep it secure for themselves.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 27, 2021)

Sugar Kane said:


> First claimed by Britain in 1765, then....like they claimed lots of places
> They just met no resistamce because it was not inhabited at the time by Argentinians or anyone else.



It's like Claiming Highbury from South London when Tottenham were closer. Oh.
I don't even like football.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 27, 2021)

Sugar Kane said:


> First claimed by Britain in 1765, then....like they claimed lots of places
> They just met no resistamce because it was not inhabited at the time by Argentinians or anyone else.



Also inaccurate. Wikipedia isn't a good source for this.


----------



## Aladdin (Oct 27, 2021)

Spymaster said:


> Also inaccurate. Wikipedia isn't a good source for this.



Wikipedia was not my source ..

Their own historic site was. 



			Our History | Falkland Islands Government


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 27, 2021)

Didn’t Paul McCartney sing ‘Give the Falklands back to the penguins’?


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 27, 2021)

Sugar Kane said:


> Wikipedia was not my source ..
> 
> Their own historic site was.
> 
> ...


That's still very light on detail. Point being they weren't "taken over" and most of the world was being claimed at that point by the Brits, French, Portugese, Dutch, Spanish, etc. It's not about whether that was good or bad but rather whether Argentina (a nation that didn't exist when they were first settled, and itself built on conquest and genocide) had/has a greater claim over them then the Brits or French.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 27, 2021)

Just rejoice at that news that Grytviken was re-taken for Pickman's model inpenguination programme.


----------



## Aladdin (Oct 27, 2021)

When will people accept that the British Empire was a land grabbing shower of cunts?


Spymaster said:


> That's still very light on detail. Point being they weren't "taken over" and most of the world was being claimed at that point by the Brits, French, Portugese, Dutch, Spanish, etc. It's not about whether that was good or bad but rather whether Argentina (a nation that didn't exist when they were first settled) had/has a greater claim over them then the Brits or French.




There actually were Spanish speaking people on the Falklands in the 16tg and 17th century who had been living there.  They were from "Argentina"
 They were "moved"... as is always the case when Empires invade.

Typically it was the British empire taking over an island for purely strategic military reasons ...
  It's typical of the British Empire. Sure. 
They were miserable cunts. 
The fact that some people living there are British doesn't take from the fact that the island was basically comandeered by the Brits and ..the Spanish and French. And the Brits kicked the French and Spanish out.  

The islands are linked to issues related to Antarctica. So its really strategic for the British  who will probably never give it back to Argentina.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 27, 2021)

Sugar Kane said:


> When will people accept that the British Empire was a land grabbing shower of cunts?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



This is also inaccurate.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 27, 2021)

Spymaster said:


> Yep. Condemn the kids who went to fight the invaders, not the dictator who caused the invasion. Twit.


If you think not being OK with shooting teenage conscripts is the same as praising the dictator in the country they hail from then surely your logic would be considered regressive by the standards of many English conscripts back in 1914.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 27, 2021)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> If you think not being OK with shooting teenage conscripts is the same as praising the dictator in the country they hail from ...



Inaccurate.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 27, 2021)

Spymaster said:


> Inaccurate.


How? Elaborate


----------



## brogdale (Oct 27, 2021)

Ah, another evening of conservatrarian entertainment.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 27, 2021)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> How? Elaborate


Well read it. Who said anything about praise?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 27, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Ah, another evening of conservatrarian entertainment.


I hope you don't mean me


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 27, 2021)

Spymaster said:


> Well read it. Who said anything about praise?


OK well "not condemning" then


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 27, 2021)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I hope you don't mean me



Pretty sure he didn't!


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 27, 2021)

Spymaster said:


> Pretty sure he didn't!


I never know with that dude he's all over the place tbh


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 27, 2021)

Sugar Kane said:


> When will people accept that the British Empire was a land grabbing shower of cunts?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


A lot of people accept that the British Empire was tyranny in action. But I can't change that. I can be appalled by it, but I can't change history.

The British did a lot of damage to Ireland.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 27, 2021)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> If you think not being OK with shooting teenage conscripts is the same as praising the dictator in the country they hail from then surely your logic would be considered regressive by the standards of many English conscripts back in 1914.


I'll try again Spy. You called the conscripts "invaders" but surely this isn't the case, they are conscripts. Fighting a war they didn't choose to be involved in. 


The rest of my paragraph re 1914 obvs remains the same.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 27, 2021)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I'll try again Spy. You called the conscripts "invaders" but surely this isn't the case, they are conscripts. Fighting a war they didn't choose to be involved in.


So do you'd sooner blame the defending/liberating forces for their deaths than the fascist regime that sent them there for their own political aims in the first place? Is that wise?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 27, 2021)

Spymaster said:


> So do you'd sooner blame the defending/liberating forces for their deaths than the fascist regime that sent them there for their own political aims in the first place?
> 
> Is that wise?


No that's not what I'm saying at all. But you know that right? I'm sure you do.


----------



## Serge Forward (Oct 27, 2021)

He knows.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 27, 2021)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> No that's not what I'm saying at all. But you know that right? I'm sure you do.


About what? 

The "conscripts" thing is a red herring. Should a conscripted army be allowed to commit genocide, for example?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 27, 2021)

Spymaster said:


> About what?
> 
> The "conscripts" thing is a red herring. Should a conscripted army be allowed to commit genocide, for example?


I seen your edit and I raise.it with " i can't be arsed" 

Goodnight Spy and goodnight all!


----------



## brogdale (Oct 27, 2021)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I seen your edit and I raise.it with " i can't be arsed"
> 
> Goodnight Spy and goodnight all!


Goodnight dude.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 27, 2021)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> If you think not being OK with shooting teenage conscripts is the same as* praising the dictator in the country they hail from* then surely your logic would be considered regressive by the standards of many English conscripts back in 1914.


I genuinely thought he was referring to Thatcher, not Galtieri


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 27, 2021)

Spymaster said:


> So do you'd sooner blame the defending/liberating forces for their deaths than the fascist regime that sent them there for their own political aims in the first place? Is that wise?


i'm blaming thatcher for sending them there in the first place just to boost her popularity


----------



## brogdale (Oct 27, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> i'm blaming thatcher for sending them there in the first place just to boost her popularity


tbh, it wasn't just for that; it was also to make good for the tory diplomatic failure that precipitated the Argentinian invasion. As the tories tend to do, they turned a threat into an 'opportunity'.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 27, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> i'm blaming thatcher for sending them there in the first place just to boost her popularity


That was a reaction to a land grab by the other fascist. Why blame her and not him?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 27, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> I genuinely thought he was referring to Thatcher, not Galtieri




The irony of your position is that had you lived under Galtieri’s regime you would have been in the first cohort to show off your high diving skills in to the River Plate.

By all means slag off Thatcher but don’t do it at the expense of sparing murderous cunt dictators.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 27, 2021)

brogdale said:


> tbh, it wasn't just for that; it was also to make good for the tory diplomatic failure that precipitated the Argentinian invasion. As the tories tend to do, they turned a threat into an 'opportunity'.


The diplomatic failings went back through successive governments, probably into the 50s.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 27, 2021)

Spymaster said:


> That was a reaction to a land grab by the other fascist. Why blame her and not him?


why not blame both? both despicable (quasi-) fascists.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 27, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The irony of your position is that had you lived under Galtieri’s regime you would have been in the first cohort to show off your high diving skills in to the River Plate.
> 
> By all means slag off Thatcher but don’t do it at the expense of sparing murderous cunt dictators.


who said i was? can you not read?


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 27, 2021)

It's not like there's an approval procedure to go through to be 'allowed' to commit genocide, is there? They tend to just fucking do it.


Spymaster said:


> The "conscripts" thing is a red herring. Should a conscripted army be allowed to commit genocide, for example?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 27, 2021)

Spymaster said:


> The diplomatic failings went back through successive governments, probably into the 50s.


To some extent, yes...but it was Ridley that failed to get the islanders or tory backwoodsmen to back his sale & leaseback policy.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 27, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> who said i was? can you not read?




Yes I can. Can you not think beyond year 4 level?


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 27, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Yes I can. Can you not think beyond year 4 level?


Yes, but it doesn't take much beyond that to think that both parties in a stupid pointless war might be at fault


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 27, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> It's not like there's an approval procedure to go through to be 'allowed' to commit genocide, is there? They tend to just fucking do it.



It was being argued earlier that the Brits were morally in the wrong because the Argentinian soldiers were conscripts (they weren't all conscripts, but let's ignore that). You'd agree that an army should be stopped from doing bad shit when ordered, even if they're conscripts?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 27, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> Yes, but it doesn't take much beyond that to think that both parties in a stupid pointless war might be at fault




So why the childish replies? Lost yer sticklebricks?


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 27, 2021)

Spymaster said:


> It was being argued earlier that the Brits were morally in the wrong because the Argentinian soldiers were conscripts (they weren't all conscripts, but let's ignore that). You'd agree that an army should be stopped from doing bad shit when ordered, even if they're conscripts?


wasn't it actually being argued that Prince Nonce was morally wrong, not the cannon fodder who were aggressively recruited from the poorest areas, just like they are now and always have been? Prince Nonce could have sat at home and done nowt. He wasn't an infantryman who saw few options to earn a living but join the army


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 27, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> So why the childish replies? Lost yer sticklebricks?


I wouldn't characterise them as childish


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 27, 2021)

brogdale said:


> To some extent, yes...but it was Ridley that failed to get the islanders or tory backwoodsmen to back his sale & leaseback policy.


Well the islanders told him to fuck off! Several times.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 27, 2021)

Spymaster said:


> Well the islanders told him to fuck off! Several times.


Exactly.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 27, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> wasn't it actually being argued that Prince Nonce was morally wrong, not the cannon fodder ...



No. You lumped them in with him.



> Volunteering to go shoot a bunch of freezing frightened teenage conscripts is not something to be praising anyone for, especially a sweaty nonce.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 27, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Exactly.



But they weren't being unreasonable.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 27, 2021)

Spymaster said:


> But they weren't being unreasonable.


Well, that's debatable, but evidently the FO had not put in sufficient preparatory 'legwork' into winning hearts & minds for the reasonable leaseback proposals. Would have saved many lives.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 27, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Well, that's debatable, but evidently the FO had not put in sufficient preparatory 'legwork' into winning hearts & minds for the reasonable leaseback proposals.



What would the legwork have been? How would you have convinced the islanders that falling under Galteiri's rule in a few year's time was fine and dandy? The "reasonable proposals" were rejected by Argentina.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 27, 2021)

Anyway....back OT...


----------



## brogdale (Oct 27, 2021)

Spymaster said:


> What would the legwork have been? How would you have convinced the islanders that falling under Galteiri's rule in a few year's time was fine and dandy?


Night.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 27, 2021)

Spymaster said:


> No. You lumped them in with him.


I don’t consider cannon fodder as volunteers


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 27, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Anyway....back OT...
> 
> View attachment 294440


Not just a nonce, a sweaty nonce.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 27, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> I don’t consider cannon fodder as volunteers


Ahhh, the old U75 ''private soldiers are all from economically disadvantaged backgrounds" schtik!

It's utter tosh, btw.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 27, 2021)

You can assert whatever you like without any qualifications


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 27, 2021)

Spymaster said:


> Ahhh, the old U75 ''private soldiers are all from economically disadvantaged backgrounds" schtik!
> 
> It's utter tosh, btw.


Yes, there's no evidence to support the belief because that sort of information is not formally collected as part of the application process. There are some limited studies referred to in this article House of Commons - Defence - Written Evidence which do bear out the general hypothesis.


----------



## Serge Forward (Oct 27, 2021)

To the regiment!!!

It's always fun when the old brigade wax lyrical about the glory days of Thatcher's/Blair's* Super Army Soldiers when they were a bulwark against fascism, etc, etc...

*Delete as appropriate


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 27, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> Yes, there's no evidence to support the belief because that sort of information is not formally collected as part of the application process. There are some limited studies referred to in this article House of Commons - Defence - Written Evidence which do bear out the general hypothesis.


An interesting read which certainly doesn't bear out OU's "cannon fodder" theory. This bit especially "30% of all recruits were exceptionally motivated and qualified young people who had wanted to join the Army for a long time" explodes it. Be interested to hear kebabking's opinion.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 27, 2021)

Hope it’s true cos otherwise that would make anyone who joins culpable


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 27, 2021)

Silly boy.


----------



## xenon (Oct 28, 2021)

Athos said:


> I'm guessing the agreement with Epstein would've been worded along the lines of '... in full and final settlement of this and any future claims against Epstein and/or any other person, arising from or relating to the facts alleged by Guiffre in these proceedings.'  It'd then be a matter for the court to decide whether that wording encompasses the subject matter of the current claim.  The Sweatless One might be able to avail himself of it without admitting anything, on purely procedural grounds.  The 'optics' would be awful, but, to be honest, they already are; from his perspective, at least it'd protect him financially, not open him up to US criminal proceedings, and allow him to avoid some pretty uncomfortable questioning.  If it fails, he can still argue a jurisdiction point. After that, he'll have little choice but to ignore proceedings and allow judgement in default, and fight any attempt at enforcement in the UK.



I know there are several more pages I haven’t read yet. But if this is what his lawyers think. Why don’t they want to you know have it opened and read. Why just presume it might say that but we don’t want you to open it to check.

Because I suspect it was drawn tighter than you suggest. And it offers him no such indemnity. Also how in forcible with such a broad agreement be anyway. Rhetorical question. I know what I think is the truth of the matter.


----------



## Humberto (Oct 28, 2021)

Spymaster said:


> An interesting read which certainly doesn't bear out OU's "cannon fodder" theory. This bit especially "30% of all recruits were exceptionally motivated and qualified young people who had wanted to join the Army for a long time" explodes it. Be interested to hear kebabking's opinion.



Whereas '40% were joining as a last resort', probably because:

_Educational background_

  The Army has a long tradition of working with Basic Skills (BS) needs among recruits. However, the increasingly competitive labour market and the need for a multi-skilled workforce capable of responding flexibly to changing demands and roles have brought the Army's BS issues into sharper focus in recent years. Latest Army research suggests that up to 50% of all recruits joining the Service have literacy or numeracy skills at levels at or below those expected of an 11 year old (ie Entry Level 3 or below). This is broadly comparable with the recent national Skills for Life survey conducted by DfES (October 2003).


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 28, 2021)

Humberto said:


> Whereas '40% were joining as a last resort', probably because:
> 
> _Educational background_
> 
> The Army has a long tradition of working with Basic Skills (BS) needs among recruits. However, the increasingly competitive labour market and the need for a multi-skilled workforce capable of responding flexibly to changing demands and roles have brought the Army's BS issues into sharper focus in recent years. Latest Army research suggests that up to 50% of all recruits joining the Service have literacy or numeracy skills at levels at or below those expected of an 11 year old (ie Entry Level 3 or below). This is broadly comparable with the recent national Skills for Life survey conducted by DfES (October 2003).




It's a damning indictment of the DfE that so many kids leave school with naff all learned, doss around for a bit, drift in to the forces and discover they are not thick as they were told by school, thickos don't service helicopters, fix tanks, lead troops on night hikes over rough terrain. It is the saviour of many youngsters in this country, regardless of how many people the same politicos who fucked up the education system demand it goes and kills elsewhere. Ire, as always needs aiming at Westminster.


----------



## Athos (Oct 28, 2021)

xenon said:


> I know there are several more pages I haven’t read yet. But if this is what his lawyers think. Why don’t they want to you know have it opened and read. Why just presume it might say that but we don’t want you to open it to check.
> 
> Because I suspect it was drawn tighter than you suggest. And it offers him no such indemnity. Also how in forcible with such a broad agreement be anyway. Rhetorical question. I know what I think is the truth of the matter.


I expect they want to rely on it in these proceedings, but for the contents not to be made public, because that'd be a breach of the protective order in the other proceedings.  I suspect they know what's in it, and will try to persuade the court that it effectively bars these proceedings, but that will be a matter for the court to interpret.


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Oct 28, 2021)

Spymaster said:


> An interesting read which certainly doesn't bear out OU's "cannon fodder" theory. This bit especially "30% of all recruits were exceptionally motivated and qualified young people who had wanted to join the Army for a long time" explodes it. Be interested to hear kebabking's opinion.


Anecdote doesn't equal data and all that, but an ex was a squaddie who was exceptionally motivated and had wanted to join the army for a long time... because he'd been in the army cadets in a working class area of Salford while he was in high school. He signed up as a school leaver, ended up serving in Desert Storm and unfortunately some of his comrades in arms didn't make it back. So, yeah, infantry, young cannon fodder.

And also my own daughter wanted to join, started off in the army cadets as a teenager when she was staying with my sister who was a manager of a NAAFI store on an army base, she got me to sign the paperwork so that she could join up under the age of 18. I didn't want to, of course, but figured she'd never forgive me if I stood in the way and prevented her. But then she got rejected because of having an ADHD diagnosis. They still let her join the TA though and she was trying to get in through the side door that way. She was exceptionally motivated too, albeit a trained chef, although in the TA she was doing something with Signals.

There will be lots of young army cadets who are exceptionally motivated to join the army. 

Also, those who join via university sponsorship will be 'exceptionally motivated' too, by the army paying their tuition fees and living expenses so they don't end up about £50k in debt, and they will probably have wanted to join for a long time too, because it was probably a career path planned via army cadets as a teenager.

'exceptionally motivated and wanted to join for a long time' still encompasses a lot of young people who were recruited by the army targeting young people from deprived areas, including those who'd been indoctrinated by army cadets.


----------



## ska invita (Oct 28, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> It's a damning indictment of the DfE that so many kids leave school with naff all learned, doss around for a bit, drift in to the forces and discover they are not thick as they were told by school, thickos don't service helicopters, fix tanks, lead troops on night hikes over rough terrain. It is the saviour of many youngsters in this country, regardless of how many people the same politicos who fucked up the education system demand it goes and kills elsewhere. Ire, as always needs aiming at Westminster.


anecdotes: my old neighbour dropped out of school 16 with sod all qualifications, was in Northern Ireland by 18, back home by 21 having been bullied and abused to fuck
luckily i dont think he got around to any state murdering

(*precise ages may vary, but not by much)


----------



## Serge Forward (Oct 28, 2021)

Lad I  was at school with went into the army from school. I bumped into him a few years later and he was bragging all about giving "the paddies" a hard time. Funnily enough, when younger, he was a nice lad and never really came across as someone who'd later become a massive cunt, but I guessed the army probably does things to people. 

Anyway, I told him, best pretend I don't exist anymore because he was fucking dead to me.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 28, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> It is the saviour of many youngsters in this country.



Them as make it back with all their limbs anyway. And who don't end up homeless addicts thanks to unaddressed PTSD. If that's salvation I'd sooner remain unsaved.

As for the DfE, gives schools a fraction of the money currently pissed away on military tat and see how many kids are still leaving school functionally illiterate.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 28, 2021)

That's some indictment of the neoliberal economy that becoming a professional killer for the state is the only salvation for our youth.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 28, 2021)

brogdale said:


> That's some indictment of the neoliberal economy that becoming a professional killer for the state is the only salvation for our youth.



They play it up too, those army cunts. They'll go out and look for desperate people. Self respect? We've got self respect for you right here. A sense of belonging? It's mandatory here in the army.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 28, 2021)

brogdale said:


> That's some indictment of the neoliberal economy that becoming a professional killer for the state is the only salvation for our youth.


so many of them prefer the amateur path, doing it for the sheer love of the sport


----------



## brogdale (Oct 28, 2021)

SpookyFrank said:


> They play it up too, those army cunts. They'll go out and look for desperate people. Self respect? We've got self respect for you right here. A sense of belonging? It's mandatory here in the army.
> 
> View attachment 294470


innit?

_Born in Blyth..._


----------



## Yossarian (Oct 28, 2021)

The only Falklands veteran I know hanged himself 14 years after the war, the military definitely wasn't his saviour.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 28, 2021)

Was HMS Sheffield not sunk with horrendous loss of life to protect the nonce cunt?


----------



## 1927 (Oct 28, 2021)

Any chance of getting back on topic and having this discussion elsewhere?


----------



## Serge Forward (Oct 28, 2021)

1927 said:


> Any chance of getting back on topic and having this discussion elsewhere?


How unpatriotic! No respect for The Regiment


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 28, 2021)

I had a friend of the family growing up who had been a para in the Falklands. He was dyslexic and had been told he wouldn't amount to much. I knew him from when I was about 6 or 7 until he dies. He was a kind and gentle man who ended up becoming a teacher who worked with kids much like himself.

Much loved, much missed.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 28, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> I had a friend of the family growing up who had been a para in the Falklands. He was dyslexic and had been told he wouldn't amount to much. I knew him from when I was about 6 or 7 until he dies. He was a kind and gentle man who ended up becoming a teacher who worked with kids much like himself.
> 
> Much loved, much missed.


No disrespect but a kind and gentle Para? Really?


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 28, 2021)

TopCat said:


> No disrespect but a kind and gentle Para? Really?


Yes. He was to me. He would never speak about what he saw over there. Think he got a medical discharge due to breaking his ankle on a landing.

I get what you're saying though. He was likely an exception not the rule.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 28, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> Yes. He was to me. He would never speak about what he saw over there. Think he got a medical discharge due to breaking his ankle on a landing.
> 
> I get what you're saying though. He was likely an exception not the rule.


He was gentle and kind to you. I bet many were like this. But they were selected and trained for murderous aggression and that’s what they did as their full time job.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 28, 2021)

xenon said:


> *I know there are several more pages I haven’t read yet*. But if this is what his lawyers think. Why don’t they want to you know have it opened and read. Why just presume it might say that but we don’t want you to open it to check.
> 
> Because I suspect it was drawn tighter than you suggest. And it offers him no such indemnity. Also how in forcible with such a broad agreement be anyway. Rhetorical question. I know what I think is the truth of the matter.


Well, you are in for a treat!


----------



## Chilli.s (Oct 28, 2021)

TopCat said:


> and that’s what they did as their full time job


Started out as adventure camping with gun turned into trained murderous aggression ended up with ptsd and suicide.

The only para I knew in any meaningful way deserted on return to the UK from active service in Falklands, got a discharge, sat in his garage for months, ended badly


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Oct 28, 2021)

One of blokes who lives in my building brags that he used to be in the army. He's an utter cunt and is one of those people that makes it obvious that he is. I have nothing to do with him and never will. And he's just the sort of rough, thick-skinned type who would choose to join up and would have no problem killing complete strangers for the ruling class, I don't doubt that for a second.

No malice or offence intended Likesfish, or anyone else who was in the military.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 28, 2021)

brogdale said:


> innit?
> 
> _Born in Blyth..._
> 
> View attachment 294471


I fucking _hate _that advert.  Deeply offensive to specific towns and even more so to parents and families of recruits.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Oct 28, 2021)

Yossarian said:


> The only Falklands veteran I know hanged himself 14 years after the war, the military definitely wasn't his saviour.


My other half's ex was in the army in Northern Ireland. Saw his mate get blown into body parts, that then had to be collected. He saw the reality of it and regretted joining the army. He knew him and his mates were not welcome in Northern Ireland, which was the opposite of what he was told. My other half also had a friend whose husband served in the Falklands, he killed himself by connecting himself up to the car exhaust in the garage. They know the truth.

My other half also knew a bloke from Fiji years ago who was conned into joining the paras. It was considered prestigious to join the British army in Fiji and his other half pressured him to do so. Britain was not at all what he was told it was and I think he also regretted joining up and moving here. The culture of this place was very different to Fiji and I was told that he was very much a fish out of water.


----------



## Sue (Oct 28, 2021)

One of the Scottish regiments used to recruit very heavily from my town -- there was a permanent army recruiting office in what was a not very big place. Quite a lot of people I was at school with joined up -- always at 16, generally troubled, many of them not very smart. Some of them didn't make it through basic training, others did and became more disciplined (to use the vernacular of the time) nutters. 

One (who was very scary indeed, people were surprised the army took him ) nearly got kicked out because he pulled a ridiculous stunt when he was on leave and broke his leg (the school friend he was with was very badly hurt).


----------



## Serge Forward (Oct 28, 2021)

I know all the above comments ar a detour from the topic of His Royal Nonceness but there are some interesting comments and it would be good to see them in their own thread (if there's not one already). Over the last couple of decades, I think there has been an increase in the militarisation of daily life, often coupled with the trend towards mandatory poppy wearing and poppies 365 days of the year.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Oct 28, 2021)

Serge Forward said:


> I know all the above comments ar a detour from the topic of His Royal Nonceness but there are some interesting comments and it would be good to see them in their own thread (if there's not one already). Over the last couple of decades, I think there has been an increase in the militarisation of daily life, often coupled with the trend towards mandatory poppy wearing and poppies 365 days of the year.


What would be a good title for such a thread and where would it go?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 28, 2021)

Serge Forward said:


> I know all the above comments ar a detour from the topic of His Royal Nonceness but there are some interesting comments and it would be good to see them in their own thread (if there's not one already). Over the last couple of decades, I think there has been an increase in the militarisation of daily life, often coupled with the trend towards mandatory poppy wearing and poppies 365 days of the year.




366 days a year, 367 on leap years, anything less then you are a MONSTER


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 28, 2021)

Count Cuckula said:


> What would be a good title for such a thread and where would it go?




"Has anyone ever served in the military and not topped themselves?"


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 28, 2021)

My father in law served 20+ years in the RN, he loved it (possibly because he met no royals during that time). Give him half a chance and he'll bore us witless. I know several former soldiers mostly of the ex Falklands or 1st Gulf War era and none of them have ever expressed any regret as far as I know. (granted they've all come home in one piece which may colour their views)


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 28, 2021)

Serge Forward said:


> Over the last couple of decades, I think there has been an increase in the militarisation of daily life, often coupled with the trend towards mandatory poppy wearing and poppies 365 days of the year.


yeh there's armed forces day, which ought to involve a great procession of military might past the london equivalent of red square or tiananmen square with all sorts of weapons of mass destruction. but instead seems to involve parades in places like cleethorpes. perhaps there simply aren't the number of soldiers these days to make such a parade in london larger than a blink and you've missed it thing. and militarisation evident calling in the troops when there are firefighters' strikes, floods or jubilees or shortages of lorry drivers


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 28, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh there's armed forces day, which ought to involve a great procession of military might past the london equivalent of red square or tiananmen square with all sorts of weapons of mass destruction. but instead seems to involve parades in places like cleethorpes. perhaps there simply aren't the number of soldiers these days to make such a parade in london larger than a blink and you've missed it thing. and militarisation evident calling in the troops when there are firefighters' strikes, floods or jubilees or shortages of lorry drivers



If the Russians ever invade Cleethorpes though, they'll regret it.

And then the army will show up.


----------



## dessiato (Oct 28, 2021)

My only regret is that I left. My father loved his time in the RAF as a medic, he regretted leaving.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 28, 2021)

dessiato said:


> My only regret is that I left. My father loved his time in the RAF as a medic, he regretted leaving.


have you ever been to the raf association place in cleethorpes?


----------



## dessiato (Oct 28, 2021)

SpookyFrank said:


> If the Russians ever invade Cleethorpes though, they'll regret it.
> 
> And then the army will show up.


Oi! I was born in Cleethorpes, Croft Baker I think. I'll not have you badmouthing it. That's my job.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 28, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh there's armed forces day, which ought to involve a great procession of military might past the london equivalent of red square or tiananmen square with all sorts of weapons of mass destruction. but instead seems to involve parades in places like cleethorpes. perhaps there simply aren't the number of soldiers these days to make such a parade in london larger than a blink and you've missed it thing. and militarisation evident calling in the troops when there are firefighters' strikes, floods or jubilees or shortages of lorry drivers


Yeah, the modern day equivalent would be a float with 3 blokes on their laptops ordering a drone strike.


----------



## dessiato (Oct 28, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> have you ever been to the raf association place in cleethorpes?


No, it doesn't appeal to me. Is it any good?


----------



## Wilf (Oct 28, 2021)

SpookyFrank said:


> If the Russians ever invade Cleethorpes though, they'll regret it.
> 
> And then the army will show up.


I always mix Cleethorpes up with Cleveleys.  AS you were.


----------



## 1927 (Oct 28, 2021)

I guess the answer to my appeal was a big fat no.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 28, 2021)

dessiato said:


> No, it doesn't appeal to me. Is it any good?


dunno, it's not the sort of place i'd go into.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 28, 2021)

1927 said:


> I guess the answer to my appeal was a big fat no.


When there's any Arid Extra Dry Nonce news, fag break will be over and we'll be straight back on it.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 28, 2021)

1927 said:


> Any chance of getting back on topic and having this discussion elsewhere?


Only when it’s run its natural course


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 28, 2021)

Wilf said:


> When there's any Arid Extra Dry Nonce news, fag break will be over and we'll be straight back on it.


If he has got until the middle of next year to muddy the waters with legal nitpicking then I am sure he will. This is going to go on for a good while yet.


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 28, 2021)

TopCat said:


> He was gentle and kind to you. I bet many were like this. But they were selected and trained for murderous aggression and that’s what they did as their full time job.


I know..He died a few years back so I can't ask him anything about his experience.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 28, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> If he has got until the middle of next year to muddy the waters with legal nitpicking then I am sure he will. This is going to go on for a good while yet.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 28, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> I know..He died a few years back so I can't ask him anything about his experience.


I have had a few friends who spent years in. Messes them up.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 28, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> I had a friend of the family growing up who had been a para in the Falklands. He was dyslexic and had been told he wouldn't amount to much.



And he spent years jumping out of a panel?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Oct 28, 2021)

DaveCinzano said:


> I'm not sure why but Bill Gates appears to have hired the Windsor Nonce's PR firm, judging by his performance here



A communication consultant gives his verdict: High on the hinky scale 😐


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 28, 2021)

Do you need a 'communication consultant' to figure out that a bloke who is babbling shit and squirming around in his chair might be lying?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Oct 28, 2021)

SpookyFrank said:


> Do you need a 'communication consultant' to figure out that a bloke who is babbling shit and squirming around in his chair might be lying?


Is that a rhetorical question?


----------



## two sheds (Oct 28, 2021)

had "dinner" ... " straightforward shooting weekend"


----------



## Wilf (Oct 28, 2021)

two sheds said:


> had "dinner" ... " straightforward shooting weekend"


I was thinking exactly that!


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 28, 2021)

TopCat said:


> I have had a few friends who spent years in. Messes them up.


I'm sorry to hear about your friends. I can imagine that some of the stuff they had to do must have really fucked with their heads.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 29, 2021)

Some actual nonce-news to report!

Today is the deadline for HWCS to file a response against the lawsuit, failure to do so will result in a default judgement against him. It is currently 1448 in London, 0948 in New York, so the clock is well and truly ticking...


----------



## MrCurry (Oct 29, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Some actual nonce-news to report!
> 
> Today is the deadline for HWCS to file a response against the lawsuit, failure to do so will result in a default judgement against him. It is currently 1448 in London, 0948 in New York, so the clock is well and truly ticking...


If he were going to do it, surely it wouldn’t get left until the last moment, so surely this can only mean they are not going to respond?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 29, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Some actual nonce-news to report!
> 
> Today is the deadline for HWCS to file a response against the lawsuit, failure to do so will result in a default judgement against him. It is currently 1448 in London, 0948 in New York, so the clock is well and truly ticking...



He must be sweating over that.

Oh, hang on a minute.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 29, 2021)

MrCurry said:


> If he were going to do it, surely it wouldn’t get left until the last moment, so surely this can only mean they are not going to respond?




I think we have to wait until Wednesday for the next thrilling instalment, that's when the next court date is.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 29, 2021)

I still can’t see how the nonce cunt can claim he is protected by the previous agreement unless he admits to being a lying rapist.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 29, 2021)

TopCat said:


> I still can’t see how the nonce cunt can claim he is protected by the previous agreement unless he admits to being a lying rapist.



I suppose perhaps in his mind she’s already had a pay off so shouldn’t be seeking another.
Really not a good strategy to take if you’re supposedly innocent though.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 29, 2021)

TopCat said:


> I still can’t see how the nonce cunt can claim he is protected by the previous agreement unless he admits to being a lying rapist.


he hasn't realised that yet


----------



## TopCat (Oct 29, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> he hasn't realised that yet


Thick nonce cunt.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 29, 2021)

Think his lawyers want to rely on the agreement without making its contents public. Also think they know very well it's not going to happen. 

Quite possibly, copping a default judgment might be his best option.


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 29, 2021)

TopCat said:


> I still can’t see how the nonce cunt can claim he is protected by the previous agreement unless he admits to being a lying rapist.


I don't think he or his lawyers know what's in the previous agreement which is why I think they want to see it in private. It's a bit of a Schrodinger's Cat agreement at the moment since it might both incriminate and indemify him at the moment.


MrCurry said:


> If he were going to do it, surely it wouldn’t get left until the last moment, so surely this can only mean they are not going to respond?


Some not very reliable googling suggests he (or his brief) has until either 3pm or 5pm (hard to tell which) to do it. They might have done so for all we know, I can't imagine the court is going to make it public and his briefs probably won't want it to be.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Oct 29, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> I don't think he or his lawyers know what's in the previous agreement which is why I think they want to see it in private. It's a bit of a Schrodinger's Cat agreement at the moment since it might both incriminate and indemify him at the moment.


It's like the grimmest episode of _Celebrity Deal Or No Deal _ever


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 29, 2021)

TopCat said:


> I still can’t see how the nonce cunt can claim he is protected by the previous agreement unless he admits to being a lying rapist.



Precisely why he wants to hide behind the agreement without anyone actually reading it.


----------



## moochedit (Oct 29, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> I don't think he or his lawyers know what's in the previous agreement which is why I think they want to see it in private. It's a bit of a Schrodinger's Cat agreement at the moment since it might both incriminate and indemify him at the moment.
> 
> Some not very reliable googling suggests he (or his brief) has until either 3pm or 5pm (hard to tell which) to do it. They might have done so for all we know, I can't imagine the court is going to make it public and his briefs probably won't want it to be.


Is that uk time or one of the usa time zones?


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 29, 2021)

moochedit said:


> Is that uk time or one of the usa time zones?


EDT New York Time so either 2000 or 2200 BST 
The article I found said 3pm if handed in or 5pm if put in a dispatch box and stamped with the time and I'm not sure how something can be stamped with time unless it gets handed to someone to do the stamping


----------



## TopCat (Oct 29, 2021)

SpookyFrank said:


> Precisely why he wants to hide behind the agreement without anyone actually reading it.


He has to be the most entitled but deluded cunt evah.


----------



## weltweit (Oct 29, 2021)

Presumably this case is being held in the US because one of the crimes took place there. And that is Andrew's out because he can't be forced to be there. 

One of the crimes happened in London though, what about if a case was brought here, could Andrew still escape being at the trial?


----------



## steveseagull (Oct 29, 2021)

I am pretty sure the EU have an extradition agreement with the US and would quite happily ship a Royal nonce off to the US so I suspect there will not be many places he can visit on our doorstep


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 29, 2021)

weltweit said:


> Presumably this case is being held in the US because one of the crimes took place there. And that is Andrew's out because he can't be forced to be there.
> 
> One of the crimes happened in London though, what about if a case was brought here, could Andrew still escape being at the trial?


Yes. He can escape any legal difficulties by the simple means of doing away with himself


----------



## Raheem (Oct 29, 2021)

steveseagull said:


> I am pretty sure the EU have an extradition agreement with the US and would quite happily ship a Royal nonce off to the US so I suspect there will not be many places he can visit on our doorstep


Think this is all correct, except this is a civil trial, so he can't be extradited.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 29, 2021)

Raheem said:


> Think this is all correct, except this is a civil trial, so he can't be extradited.


Surely he can be rendered


----------



## Saul Goodman (Oct 29, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> Surely he can be rendered


Pebbledashing would be a better look.


----------



## Serge Forward (Oct 29, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> Surely he can be rendered


Or rendered down into dripping.

Edit: Though I suspect lizard dripping isn't very nice.


----------



## scalyboy (Oct 29, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> Surely he can be rendered


Rendered into penguin feed? A nutritious supplement to help them through the cold. Just add sweat


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 29, 2021)

scalyboy said:


> Rendered into penguin feed? A nutritious supplement to help them through the cold. Just add sweat


I was thinking of being kidnapped and delivered into the hands of more repressive regimes


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 29, 2021)

DaveCinzano said:


> It's like the grimmest episode of _Celebrity Deal Or No Deal _ever




They should dig up Edmonds’s corpse and animatronic him to preside over things.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Oct 29, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> They should dig up Edmonds’s corpse and animatronic him to preside over things.


Is he dead? Or is it wishful thinking?


----------



## 1927 (Oct 29, 2021)

Can someone please explain to me why his legal team wanted the agreement unsealed and now they don’t?


----------



## moochedit (Oct 29, 2021)

1927 said:


> Can someone please explain to me why his legal team wanted the agreement unsealed and now they don’t?


They obviously didn't like what it said. who knows exactly what they didn't like about it though.


----------



## moochedit (Oct 29, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> Is he dead? Or is it wishful thinking?


His wiki says "is" not "was" so i think he still has a pulse.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Oct 29, 2021)

moochedit said:


> His wiki says "is" not "was" so i think he still has a pulse.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 29, 2021)

scalyboy said:


> Rendered into penguin feed? A nutritious supplement to help them through the cold. Just add sweat





Pickman's model said:


> I was thinking of being kidnapped and delivered into the hands of more repressive regimes


----------



## DaveCinzano (Oct 29, 2021)

1927 said:


> Can someone please explain to me why his legal team wanted the agreement unsealed and now they don’t?


----------



## Athos (Oct 29, 2021)

1927 said:


> Can someone please explain to me why his legal team wanted the agreement unsealed and now they don’t?


Because it's subject to a protective order in other proceedings, which means Andrew can only file it in these proceedings - which he wants to because he claims it bars her from claiming against him - if the judge allows it to be kept under seal.  The judge has done so, but strongly advised the parties to to apply to the judge in the other proceedings to allow it to be made public (which both parties say they have no issue with).


----------



## 1927 (Oct 29, 2021)

DaveCinzano said:


> View attachment 294694


Very useful. Not!


----------



## moochedit (Oct 29, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> EDT New York Time so either 2000 or 2200 BST
> The article I found said 3pm if handed in or 5pm if put in a dispatch box and stamped with the time and I'm not sure how something can be stamped with time unless it gets handed to someone to do the stamping


So we are past 10pm   any developments?


----------



## Athos (Oct 29, 2021)

moochedit said:


> So we are past 10pm   any developments?


Looks like he filed something asking for her claim to be kicked out (or, in the alternative, to provide more detail).









						Prince Andrew 'unequivocally' denies Giuffre's sexual abuse claims, seeks to end lawsuit
					

Britain's Prince Andrew on Friday rejected Virginia Giuffre's accusations that he sexually abused her more than two decades ago when she was 17, and urged a U.S. judge to dismiss her civil lawsuit.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## Wilf (Oct 29, 2021)

DaveCinzano said:


> It's like the grimmest episode of _Celebrity Deal Or No Deal _ever


I wonder if celebrity nonces have a circle of celebrity nonce supporters when they have to make these difficult decisions?  '_Stay strong babes, you always were the leader of the pack, love Gary_'.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 29, 2021)

I've only read that one article linked, but it sounds like Andrew's new argument is "So she alleges I sexually abused her multiple times when she was a trafficked minor? Is that it?!? Where's the beef?"


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 29, 2021)

Raheem said:


> I've only read that one article linked, but it sounds like Andrew's new argument is "So she alleges I sexually abused her multiple times when she was a trafficked minor? Is that it?!? Where's the beef?"


If that's his argument I feel it rather wafer thin on substance.


----------



## Athos (Oct 29, 2021)

Raheem said:


> I've only read that one article linked, but it sounds like Andrew's new argument is "So she alleges I sexually abused her multiple times when she was a trafficked minor? Is that it?!? Where's the beef?"


Without seeing it, it's hard to know exactly what he's saying, but this gives you some idea of the possibilities.









						Rule 12(b)(6) for law students | Legal Blog
					

FRCP Rule 12(b)(6) is one of the most important topics in civil procedure, and one of the most discussed on law school exams.




					legal.thomsonreuters.com
				




Given he's asked for more details, I'm guessing he's saying she's not provided enough facts to make out a _prima facie _case against him. Probably a tactic to get her to commit to more detail, in the hope that some of it is likely to be provably inaccurate (because of the passage of time), which he'll exploit to undermine her.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Oct 29, 2021)

Athos said:


> Without seeing it, it's hard to know exactly what he's saying, but this gives you some idea of the possibilities.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


This would be his stumbling block. 



> Practically speaking, the judge would usually give the plaintiff leave to amend if a legal cause of action was apparent from the facts



Because its apparent to any fule that he's a sweaty nonce.


----------



## Athos (Oct 29, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> This would be his stumbling block.
> 
> 
> 
> Because its apparent to any fule that he's a sweaty nonce.


Yeah, I'd be surprised if the claim was struck out; rather she'll probably be required to provide more specifics of what she's alleging.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 29, 2021)

It's most likely mainly about causing delay and building up costs, I'd guess. Presumably, there will have to be an additional hearing to consider whether the claim should be struck down.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 29, 2021)

he's hardly keeping this out of the headlines is he ? claiming that's she's in it for the money is an aggresive stance to take.  Hes fucked here whatever, but thats hardly news. Skint also for the purposes of the trial.


----------



## andysays (Oct 30, 2021)

not-bono-ever said:


> he's hardly keeping this out of the headlines is he ? claiming that's she's in it for the money is an aggresive stance to take.  Hes fucked here whatever, but thats hardly news. Skint also for the purposes of the trial.


Second story on the BBC website this morning, using that now famous photo which couldn't possibly be him

Prince Andrew asks US court to dismiss case​






There's also a quote from the lawyers about what they allege the "agreement" contains



> The filing says Ms Giuffre settled sex trafficking and abuse claims against Epstein in 2009 with a "broad release" negotiated by the convicted sex offender "insisting that it cover any and all persons who Giuffre identified as potential targets of future lawsuits, regardless of the merit - or lack thereof - to any such claims".


----------



## andysays (Oct 30, 2021)

This last bit looks to me like a tacit admission of his involvement



> The agreement, which remains sealed, *is said to cover "royalty"* - according to the document presented to the court.


----------



## High Voltage (Oct 30, 2021)

Why didn't they just go the whole hog and exempt "any and all royalty whose initials contain A and W"


----------



## TopCat (Oct 30, 2021)

"Giuffre has initiated this baseless lawsuit against Prince Andrew to achieve another payday at his expense and at the expense of those closest to him. Epstein's abuse of Giuffre does not justify her public campaign against Prince Andrew," the document states.

Fucking cunt. Another payday. Rapist bastard.


----------



## 1927 (Oct 30, 2021)

TopCat said:


> "Giuffre has initiated this baseless lawsuit against Prince Andrew to achieve another payday at his expense and at the expense of those closest to him. Epstein's abuse of Giuffre does not justify her public campaign against Prince Andrew," the document states.
> 
> Fucking cunt. Another payday. Rapist bastard.


That was the bit that shocked me, not a good look going after the victim like that.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 30, 2021)

We are very near to London Bridge. A lot of media shit I think has been held back in deference of the hag.


----------



## Athos (Oct 30, 2021)

TopCat said:


> "Giuffre has initiated this baseless lawsuit against Prince Andrew to achieve another payday at his expense and at the expense of those closest to him. Epstein's abuse of Giuffre does not justify her public campaign against Prince Andrew," the document states.
> 
> Fucking cunt. Another payday. Rapist bastard.


That jumped out at me. Talk about crass. What a prick.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 30, 2021)

Athos said:


> That jumped out at me. Talk about crass. What a prick.


Has he and his team any idea of how the above is perceived?


----------



## TopCat (Oct 30, 2021)

It reminds me of the bit in that interview where he offered not a jot of sympathy.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 30, 2021)

Just terming her compensation for abuse and rape by Epstein as a payday is really fucking shocking.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Oct 30, 2021)

TopCat said:


> Has he and his team any idea of how the above is perceived?





TopCat said:


> It reminds me of the bit in that interview where he offered not a jot of sympathy.


He's living on a different plane. He probably thinks he has an absolute right to rape people. He is royalty, after all.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 30, 2021)

TopCat said:


> Just terming her compensation for abuse and rape by Epstein as a payday is really fucking shocking.


Shocking, in the sense that their desperation has drawn such a public expression of his psychopathy, but not totally shocking that it reveals his mindset.


----------



## Athos (Oct 30, 2021)

TopCat said:


> Has he and his team any idea of how the above is perceived?


I think he's gone full 'US-litigator-gloves-off.'  He knows he's lost in the court of public opinion, but will do whatever it takes to avoid an enforceable judgement ageist him in these proceedings


----------



## TopCat (Oct 30, 2021)

The US press are less than deferential in reporting. 
Prince Andrew Mounts Attack Against Woman Who Accused Him of Sexual Abuse​Andrew, the second son of Queen Elizabeth II, said the woman was seeking financial gain from one of the world’s best known royal families.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 30, 2021)

Prince Andrew Mounts Attack Against Woman Who Accused Him of Sexual Abuse
					

Andrew, the second son of Queen Elizabeth II, said the woman was seeking financial gain from one of the world’s best known royal families.




					www.nytimes.com


----------



## andysays (Oct 30, 2021)

Athos said:


> I think he's gone full 'US-litigator-gloves-off.'  He knows he's lost in the court of public opinion, but will do whatever it takes to avoid an enforceable judgement ageist him in these proceedings


He's already pretty much lost in the court of public opinion, but this latest will hopefully remove any remaining shred of dignity he might have hoped to salvage.


----------



## dessiato (Oct 30, 2021)

TopCat said:


> Has he and his team any idea of how the above is perceived?


They can't have, if they did they'd know to keep their, and especially his, mouths firmly closed.


----------



## Serge Forward (Oct 30, 2021)

What a cunt. I can't help feeling he'll get away with this one, especially as it's a civil case and, y'know, prior "agreement" like. But as Nonce Andrew's strategy is pretty much "What if I am a nonce? But you agreed not to take Epstein's fellow nonces to court".... is there a possibility of it reopening a criminal case again?


----------



## Saul Goodman (Oct 30, 2021)

Serge Forward said:


> is there a possibility of it reopening a criminal case again?


In the UK? No. He's already proved he's exempt from UK law.


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 30, 2021)

TopCat said:


> Has he and his team any idea of how the above is perceived?


Some of them probably do but he's a bit Trumpian and doesn't listen to the people around him or he would never have given that car crash of an interview


----------



## MrCurry (Oct 30, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> Some of them probably do but he's a bit Trumpian and doesn't listen to the people around him or he would never have given that car crash of an interview


Either that or Emily Maitless has been appointed to run the legal team after her sterling success on the media strategy 👌


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 30, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> Some of them probably do but he's a bit Trumpian and doesn't listen to the people around him or he would never have given that car crash of an interview


And he initially thought it went quite well


----------



## Serge Forward (Oct 30, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> In the UK? No. He's already proved he's exempt from UK law.


True, but I was thinking about America.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 30, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> Some of them probably do but he's a bit Trumpian and doesn't listen to the people around him or he would never have given that car crash of an interview


Too fucking honourable.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 30, 2021)

MrCurry said:


> Either that or Emily Maitless has been appointed to run the legal team after her sterling success on the media strategy 👌


She is a Tory and I think started wanting to be supportive. Then he started talking.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 30, 2021)

What’s this stuff about him having no assets?


----------



## Athos (Oct 30, 2021)

TopCat said:


> What’s this stuff about him having no assets?


He doesn't own anything. Mum provides a house, and he just ponces of people for holidays, meals, golf, etc., (possibly having transferred other assets out of reach).


----------



## Athos (Oct 30, 2021)

Serge Forward said:


> True, but I was thinking about America.


I'd be very surprised if a civil settlement could preclude future criminal proceedings, even in the US.  But, equally, it'd be an uphill battle to prove criminal conduct beyond reasonable doubt; it'd probably come down to her word against his.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Oct 30, 2021)

TopCat said:


> What’s this stuff about him having no assets?


One does not deal with such trivial matters. One simply lives in one of the houses and mummy supplies spends.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 30, 2021)

Athos said:


> He doesn't own anything. Mum provides a house, and he just ponces of people for holidays, meals, golf, etc., (possibly having transferred other assets out of reach).




Yeah, the only believable bit of his Newsnight skip-fire was when he claimed to not know where the bar is in Tramp.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 30, 2021)

TopCat said:


> What’s this stuff about him having no assets?


He should have millions from the sale of his sunningdale home Prince Andrew’s old Berkshire home has been replaced by an ultra-modern mansion


----------



## TopCat (Oct 30, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> One does not deal with such trivial matters. One simply lives in one of the houses and mummy supplies spends.


The Tramp bar thing. He was saying he didn’t know where the bar was despite stumbling out sweating throughout his life. 
Was he really asserting he never ever bought a drink? What a cunt.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 30, 2021)

TopCat said:


> The Tramp bar thing. He was saying he didn’t know where the bar was despite stumbling out sweating throughout his life.
> Was he really asserting he never ever bought a drink? What a cunt.


Despite his ability to fly a helicopter and command a ship his interior navigation skills are worse than useless


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 30, 2021)

TopCat said:


> The Tramp bar thing. He was saying he didn’t know where the bar was despite stumbling out sweating throughout his life.
> Was he really asserting he never ever bought a drink? What a cunt.


Friend of mine who used to frequent the place reckoned you couldn't possibly miss the bar as it was the first thing you saw. 

Me, I believe the Pizza Express story (but that the visit was very early in the evening). One would certainly remember one's one and only visit to such an extablishment.


----------



## weltweit (Oct 30, 2021)

This certainly seems to be the thread that keeps on giving, but I wish I could restrain myself for clicking on it because the subject matter doesn't have a lot of appeal.


----------



## dessiato (Oct 30, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> He should have millions from the sale of his sunningdale home Prince Andrew’s old Berkshire home has been replaced by an ultra-modern mansion


I used to go there. It's quite ugly. There used to be two or three crashed cars round the back.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 30, 2021)

weltweit said:


> This certainly seems to be the thread that keeps on giving, but I wish I could restrain myself for clicking on it because the subject matter doesn't have a lot of appeal.


I wish we could fast forward to him being strung up from a lamppost and shot.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 30, 2021)

TopCat said:


> I wish we could fast forward to him being strung up from a lamppost and shot.


Belt and braces


----------



## Saul Goodman (Oct 30, 2021)

TopCat said:


> The Tramp bar thing. He was saying he didn’t know where the bar was despite stumbling out sweating throughout his life.
> Was he really asserting he never ever bought a drink? What a cunt.


Royal family in take, take, take shocker!


----------



## TopCat (Oct 30, 2021)

Ah. Apparently he doesn't drink or sweat. 

'There are a number of things that are wrong with that story, one of which is that I don’t know where the bar is in Tramp’s. I don’t drink, I don’t think I’ve ever bought a drink in Tramp’s whenever I was there.’


----------



## TopCat (Oct 30, 2021)

wank


----------



## TopCat (Oct 30, 2021)

fuck!


----------



## Saul Goodman (Oct 30, 2021)

.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 30, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> Wrong thread?


Delete PLEASE!


----------



## TopCat (Oct 30, 2021)

Ta


----------



## scalyboy (Oct 30, 2021)

Athos said:


> He doesn't own anything. Mum provides a house, and he just ponces of people for holidays, meals, golf, etc., (possibly having transferred other assets out of reach).


Poncy nonce. Noncy ponce. The Noncing Prince Ponce … etc


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 30, 2021)

bluescreen said:


> Friend of mine who used to frequent the place reckoned you couldn't possibly miss the bar as it was the first thing you saw.
> 
> Me, I believe the Pizza Express story (but that the visit was very early in the evening). One would certainly remember one's one and only visit to such an extablishment.


And the fact it was the same day you raped a trafficking victim.


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 30, 2021)

One might be inclined to forget something that was a common occurrence, such as going to parties and having a jolly time don't you know.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 30, 2021)

TopCat said:


> Ah. Apparently he doesn't drink or sweat.
> 
> 'There are a number of things that are wrong with that story, one of which is that I don’t know where the bar is in Tramp’s. I don’t drink, I don’t think I’ve ever bought a drink in Tramp’s whenever I was there.’


Isn't it vampires who don't drink (other than blood) or sweat?


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 30, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> He should have millions from the sale of his sunningdale home Prince Andrew’s old Berkshire home has been replaced by an ultra-modern mansion


Doubtful. Bet he owes millions elsewhere.


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 30, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> Doubtful. Bet he owes millions elsewhere.


Who knows what other claims there may be on his meagre resources?


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 30, 2021)

He sold a £17M ski chalet recently. Presumably that cash has now been placed out of reach. 









						Prince Andrew 'sells £17,000,000 chalet' as sexual assault case rumbles on
					

The sale will also 'bring another legal dispute involving the duke to a close'.




					www.google.co.uk


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 30, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> Doubtful. Bet he owes millions elsewhere.


He's supposed to have a £32.5m fortune








						Prince Andrew’s 'scandalous' billionaire lifestyle - ski chalet & £200k Bentley
					

The Duke of York could be ordered to pay damages in excess of £14million if he loses his sex abuse case, but mystery remains over his lavish spending over the years




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 30, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> He's supposed to have a £32.5m fortune
> 
> 
> 
> ...


There's an issue with the ski chalet, he was getting sued by the people who sold it to him as he hadn't paid in full French socialite revealed as former friend suing Prince Andrew and Sarah, Duchess of York for £6.7 million owed on Swiss ski chalet
Also him and Fergue bought it on a mortgage, not cash, so even if sold the mortgage gets paid first.

Does make one wonder where his alleged fortune come from, I expect he's moving assets out of his name as we speak...


----------



## 1927 (Oct 30, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> There's an issue with the ski chalet, he was getting sued by the people who sold it to him as he hadn't paid in full French socialite revealed as former friend suing Prince Andrew and Sarah, Duchess of York for £6.7 million owed on Swiss ski chalet
> Also him and Fergue bought it on a mortgage, not cash, so even if sold the mortgage gets paid first.
> 
> Does make one wonder where his alleged fortune come from, I expect he's moving assets out of his name as we speak...


I’d love it if he moved any assets he did have to Fergie and then she binned him off!


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 30, 2021)

1927 said:


> I’d love it if he moved any assets he did have to Fergie and then she binned him off!


It's baffling the way she's always so short of money. What does she spend it all on? AFAIK no one is suing her, so it's not lawyers' fees.


----------



## Chilli.s (Oct 30, 2021)

bluescreen said:


> It's baffling the way she's always so short of money. What does she spend it all on? AFAIK no one is suing her, so it's not lawyers' fees.


I guess we all underestimate her ability to piss through cash, a  skill that's only really tested when it took no work to earn it or it's someone else gave it to you


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 30, 2021)

bluescreen said:


> It's baffling the way she's always so short of money. What does she spend it all on? AFAIK no one is suing her, so it's not lawyers' fees.




She still thinks of herself as a royal and lives the lifestyle but without the royal list dosh or the country paying for some dubious trip. So when she visits New York she must pay for it herself, first class return on BA = £14,468.57. Heathrow's Windsor Suite, the private terminal next to T5 built for royals and ministers but now a private company that the government pays for the royals and ministers to use, the public can use it too, £2750+VAT there, same when she arrives back. So we're over twenty grand just on that. Soon adds up all this crap. Luckily it seems that Andy won't be leaving the UK anytime soon, so that's one expense saved.


----------



## MrCurry (Oct 30, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Heathrow's Windsor Suite, the private terminal next to T5 built for royals and ministers but now a private company that the government pays for the royals and ministers to use, the public can use it too, £2750+VAT there,


Plush!  Is it a portacabin?  About the right size and shape..


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 30, 2021)

Looks like a converted garage...


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 30, 2021)

That boxed off bit in the corner - that's the bogs, right?

Eh, where did you get this picture from, is it pukka?


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 30, 2021)

I think they could have chosen a better colour scheme than brown. Money certainly can't buy taste.


----------



## MrCurry (Oct 30, 2021)

bluescreen said:


> That boxed off bit in the corner - that's the bogs, right?
> 
> Eh, where did you get this picture from, is it pukka?


It was the first hit on a Google images search for “Heathrow Windsor suite”, but who knows


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 30, 2021)

MrCurry said:


> It was the first hit on a Google images search for “Heathrow Windsor suite”, but who knows



I assume that's one room of the suite [of rooms].


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 30, 2021)

And the bogs is number two


----------



## scalyboy (Oct 30, 2021)

bluescreen said:


> That boxed off bit in the corner - that's the bogs, right?
> 
> Eh, where did you get this picture from, is it pukka?


Looks like it. Quite cramped inside. Anyone going in will find it impossible to ignore Albert Steptoe who sidles up to people, offering them a splash of perfume and recommending the liquid soap. 

“If yer want the carzey it’s a tanner, but if you’re after a Johnny, the machine’s on the wall. Two bob for a packet of three”


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 30, 2021)

MrCurry said:


> Plush!  Is it a portacabin?  About the right size and shape..
> 
> View attachment 294792





bluescreen said:


> Looks like a converted garage...





equationgirl said:


> I think they could have chosen a better colour scheme than brown. Money certainly can't buy taste.




First class lounges are more plush, the Windsor Suite doesn’t sell itself on luxury. The selling point is you don’t go through a passenger terminal, you drive to the suite, they check you in and take your bags to the plane, there is security and immigration there and once the plane is ready to go they drive you over to it, up the steps and off it goes. Not having to mix it with the scum is what people pay for.


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 30, 2021)

I presume you don't have to take off your shoes and belts or put up with security patting down your junk if you use this terminal then?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 30, 2021)

scalyboy said:


> Looks like it. Quite cramped inside. Anyone going in will find it impossible to ignore Albert Steptoe who sidles up to people, offering them a splash of perfume and recommending the liquid soap.
> 
> “If yer want the carzey it’s a tanner, but if you’re after a Johnny, the machine’s on the wall. Two bob for a packet of three”



There's eight of those boxes though, so you'll not be knocking knees with the other oligarchs or whatever.


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 30, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> First class lounges are more plush, the Windsor Suite doesn’t sell itself on luxury. The selling point is you don’t go through a passenger terminal, you drive to the suite, they check you in and take your bags to the plane, there is security and immigration there and once the plane is ready to go they drive you over to it, up the steps and off it goes. Not having to mix it with the scum is what people pay for.


Yes, I completely get that. But the colour scheme is still.minging.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 30, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> Yes, I completely get that. But the colour scheme is still.minging.



Yeah, it’s the main reason I don’t use it…


----------



## JimW (Oct 30, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> I presume you don't have to take off your shoes and belts or put up with security patting down your junk if you use this terminal then?


No, but you have to watch out for Handsy Andy if he's off skiing the same day.


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 30, 2021)

JimW said:


> No, but you have to watch out for Handsy Andy if he's off skiing the same day.


I'm WAY too old for his tastes


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 30, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Yeah, it’s the main reason I don’t use it…


That and the fact you're sensible. I bet you don't even get a free minibar if you use it.


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 30, 2021)

We're all too old for his tastes. Thankfully.


MickiQ said:


> I'm WAY too old for his tastes


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 30, 2021)

The Sweatless One's lawyers indulge in a nice bit of victim-blaming, with Giuffre accused of procuring 'slutty girls' for Epstein.
Blech
Prince Andrew accuses Virginia Giuffre of ‘procuring slutty girls for sexual abuse by Epstein’​




__





						archive.ph
					





					archive.ph


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 30, 2021)

He clearly doesn't know when to put a sock in it and just shut the fuck up.
How would he know I thought he claimed to have never met her?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 30, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> He clearly doesn't know when to put a sock in it and just shut the fuck up.
> How would he know I thought he claimed to have never met her?


Everything smacks of utter desperation atm


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 30, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> He clearly doesn't know when to put a sock in it and just shut the fuck up.
> How would he know I thought he claimed to have never met her?


Totally tone deaf, as is so often the way with people so privileged they think they live on another planet.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Oct 30, 2021)

bluescreen said:


> The Sweatless One's lawyers indulge in a nice bit of victim-blaming, with Giuffre accused of procuring 'slutty girls' for Epstein.
> Blech
> Prince Andrew accuses Virginia Giuffre of ‘procuring slutty girls for sexual abuse by Epstein’​
> 
> ...


Is Harvey Weinstein his new advisor?


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 30, 2021)

It's as if they can't see the way their middle-aged-men fantasies are projected large on the screen for everyone to see.


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 30, 2021)

All this victim blaming is not going to end well for him.

It's Virginia Guiffre that has my sympathies.


----------



## Chilli.s (Oct 30, 2021)

bluescreen said:


> Totally tone deaf, as is so often the way with people so privileged they think they live on another planet.


It's like he doesn't know what no means as its never been said to him


----------



## dessiato (Oct 31, 2021)

Even if he were innocent, he's doing a great job of making himself look guilty.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Oct 31, 2021)

dessiato said:


> Even if he were innocent, he's doing a great job of making himself look guilty.


Being guilty tends to do a great job of making you look guilty.


----------



## dessiato (Oct 31, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> Being guilty tends to do a great job of making you look guilty.


I believe he is guilty. His behaviour, and that of his legal representatives, does nothing to mitigate that. A case of (he) doth protest too much.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 31, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> He clearly doesn't know when to put a sock in it and just shut the fuck up.
> *How would he know I thought he claimed to have never met her?*



Looks like it's something his US lawyers have come up with, rather than him. 



> In a controversial attempt to prove his innocence, lawyers for the Duke of York have painted Virginia Giuffre as an alleged criminal who worked to procure underage “slutty girls” for Jeffrey Epstein, the paedophile billionaire.





> The court papers quote Crystal Figueroa, the sister of one of Giuffre’s ex-boyfriends, who claims she was asked by Andrew’s accuser for help in recruiting minors: “She [Giuffre] would say to me, ‘Do you know any girls who are kind of slutty?’”



I doubt he has been questioning 'the sister of one of Giuffre’s ex-boyfriends', so must be the US lawyers.


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 31, 2021)

cupid_stunt said:


> Looks like it's something his US lawyers have come up with, rather than him.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Indeed. But a normal person has some kind of control over their lawyers and what gets put forward as a defence.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 31, 2021)

bluescreen said:


> It's as if they can't see the way their middle-aged-men fantasies are projected large on the screen for everyone to see.


Speak for yourself.


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Oct 31, 2021)

TopCat said:


> Has he and his team any idea of how the above is perceived?


No. They live in a rarefied world where the little people are of no concern, except as staff and playthings and subjects of exploitation.


----------



## moochedit (Oct 31, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> There's an issue with the ski chalet, he was getting sued by the people who sold it to him as he hadn't paid in full French socialite revealed as former friend suing Prince Andrew and Sarah, Duchess of York for £6.7 million owed on Swiss ski chalet
> Also him and Fergue bought it on a mortgage, not cash, so even if sold the mortgage gets paid first.
> 
> Does make one wonder where his alleged fortune come from, I expect he's moving assets out of his name as we speak...


If they bought it on a mortgage wouldn't their bank or building society pay the old owners?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Oct 31, 2021)

moochedit said:


> If they bought it on a mortgage wouldn't their bank or building society pay the old owners?


Why would the lender dole out money to someone they don't have a contractual agreement with?


----------



## 1927 (Oct 31, 2021)

DaveCinzano said:


> Why would the lender dole out money to someone they don't have a contractual agreement with?


i think you missed the point. when you by a property with a mortgage you dont actually ever see the money do you?, the mortgage company pay the money directly to the seller, or at least via your solicitor.


----------



## 1927 (Oct 31, 2021)

moochedit said:


> If they bought it on a mortgage wouldn't their bank or building society pay the old owners?


it wasn't all financed with a mortgage. Queen lobbed in some money and I believe there was still a shortfall which is the bit he never paid and which he is being sued for.


----------



## Sue (Oct 31, 2021)

DaveCinzano said:


> Why would the lender dole out money to someone they don't have a contractual agreement with?


Do you not need provable assets or income to even get a mortgage? Or is that just for us little people?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 31, 2021)

The Verbier place was half paid on mortgage and the other half to be paid later, but the old welcher never coughed up so the former owner started proceedings to recover the cash, seems he flogged it to pay her off, which would also pay off the bank and afaik there's some left over.


----------



## Chilli.s (Oct 31, 2021)

Sue said:


> is that just for us little people?


'Fraid so. That's how MPs get all those property deals when they leave the commons. They don't trot down to lloyds/barclays and fill in a big form.  Coutts and the like do their loans.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 31, 2021)

cupid_stunt said:


> The court papers quote Crystal Figueroa, the sister of one of Giuffre’s ex-boyfriends


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 31, 2021)

bluescreen said:


> Indeed. But a normal person has some kind of control over their lawyers and what gets put forward as a defence.



Totally agree, I was only answering the question - *How would he know I thought he claimed to have never met her?*

Certainly not defending the nonce in anyway.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 31, 2021)

Sue said:


> Do you not need provable assets or income to even get a mortgage? Or is that just for us little people?


Perhaps he got ma to act as guarantor


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 31, 2021)

bluescreen said:


> Indeed. But a normal person has some kind of control over their lawyers and what gets put forward as a defence.


A normal person doesn't suggest this sort of thing to their lawyers


----------



## TopCat (Oct 31, 2021)

Athos said:


> I think he's gone full 'US-litigator-gloves-off.'  He knows he's lost in the court of public opinion, but will do whatever it takes to avoid an enforceable judgement ageist him in these proceedings


he has now innit?


----------



## MrCurry (Oct 31, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The Verbier place was half paid on mortgage and the other half to be paid later, but the old welcher never coughed up so the former owner started proceedings to recover the cash, seems he flogged it to pay her off, which would also pay off the bank and afaik there some left over.


Must be another example of him being “just too honourable sometimes” or whatever it was he blurted out in that interview.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 31, 2021)

TopCat said:


> he has now innit?


Prince Charles has summoned his courtiers and demanded 'will no one rid me of this turbulent prince?'


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 31, 2021)

MrCurry said:


> Must be another example of him being “just too honourable sometimes” or whatever it was he blurted out in that interview.


He's as honourable as the day is long. Which isn't saying much at this time of year


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 31, 2021)

We should start a book on the next member of the royal family to die. Prince Andrew has just thrust himself up the list, the odds on him seeing Xmas 2022 must be lengthening. In the past Prince Philip would have handled things as he did with prince John, princess Margaret and of course Diana but now they'll have to get someone else in to mastermind the assassination


----------



## brogdale (Oct 31, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> He's as honourable as the day is long. Which isn't saying much at this time of year


Still 51 days until we reach 'rock bottom'


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 31, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Still 51 days until we reach 'rock bottom'


Perhaps Andrew could be buried alive at sea above the Mariana trench, because deep down he's a good person


----------



## moochedit (Oct 31, 2021)

1927 said:


> it wasn't all financed with a mortgage. Queen lobbed in some money and I believe there was still a shortfall which is the bit he never paid and which he is being sued for.


Fair enough. That explains it.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Oct 31, 2021)

1927 said:


> i think you missed the point.


I don't think I did


----------



## tim (Oct 31, 2021)

TopCat said:


> If Maxwell points the finger at him that will be compelling evidence. She may claim coercion from her dead ex and a difficult upbringing etc and throw shit about.


If Maxwell points her finger at him, the Prince will send round a chap with a bone-saw to chop it off.


----------



## 1927 (Oct 31, 2021)

DaveCinzano said:


> I don't think I did


Then your post makes no sense!


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 31, 2021)

1927 said:


> Then your post makes no sense!


Only if you have no sense


----------



## 1927 (Oct 31, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> Only if you have no sense


Explain then!


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 31, 2021)

1927 said:


> Explain then!


Shan’t


----------



## scalyboy (Oct 31, 2021)

The wording of his royal nonceness’s lawyers’ statements is appalling, but they won’t have been his own personal words. 

That said, he will presumably have had a look before they went ahead with them, so he is culpable in that sense.

Judging by the car crash Maitlis interview where he expressed not a jot of sympathy for Epstein’s (and his?) victims, I can fully understand why he would’ve felt there was nothing wrong with the victim blaming. Slutty, money-grubbing lower classes bothering him unnecessarily - what a crashing bore. 

It’s almost as if being born into a life of unimaginable privilege and luxury would tend towards some kind of sociopathy …


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 1, 2021)

“Money hungry sex kitten.”

“Head bitch.”

That is what Queen Elizabeth II’s money has paid US lawyers to say on behalf of her favourite son about a woman who was sexually abused as a child.

Lovely.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 1, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> That is what your money has paid US lawyers to say on behalf of her favourite son about a woman was was sexually abused as a child.



Cfy


----------



## Chilli.s (Nov 1, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> “Money hungry sex kitten.”
> 
> “Head bitch.”
> 
> ...


It aint a good look


----------



## Athos (Nov 1, 2021)

This might be of interest.


----------



## bluescreen (Nov 1, 2021)

In completely unrelated news, Jes Staley is stepping down as chief exec of Barclays group following a regulatory investigation into the way he described his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. Staley is contesting the conclusions, which made no findings that Staley knew about Epstein's crimes.

More, but not very much more, here (paywall): Subscribe to read | Financial Times


----------



## bluescreen (Nov 1, 2021)

Athos said:


> This might be of interest.


Tell us more.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 1, 2021)

Athos said:


> This might be of interest.


What is 'this' and why might it be of interest?


----------



## TopCat (Nov 1, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> “Money hungry sex kitten.”
> 
> “Head bitch.”
> 
> ...


We get snippets. Is the whole document available?


----------



## TopCat (Nov 1, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> What is 'this' and why might it be of interest?


It’s the court documents. Super.


----------



## Athos (Nov 1, 2021)

bluescreen said:


> Tell us more.





Pickman's model said:


> What is 'this' and why might it be of interest?



They're some of his recent filings in the proceedings (albeit with redactions).


----------



## MrCurry (Nov 1, 2021)

Athos said:


> They're some of his recent filings in the proceedings (albeit with redactions).


Quite a lot of redactions in the case of the third one you’ve added… it’s nothing but redaction! Doc 1 is quite juicy though.


----------



## bluescreen (Nov 1, 2021)

So as not to derail this Royal thread I've put more about Jes Staley over on the Epstein clone thread. I expect there will be a few more rolling heads.








						Did Jeffrey Epstein clone himself, or sell secrets to Mossad, and other questions
					

Some musician called Leland Nally wrote this 12,000 word feature for Mother Jones last year.  In my opinion it didn't create the waves it should have: I called everyone in Jeffrey Epstein's little black book.  Maybe editors pooh-poohed it because Nally isn't a journalist? Maybe nobody read it to...




					www.urban75.net


----------



## Athos (Nov 1, 2021)

MrCurry said:


> Quite a lot of redactions in the case of the third one you’ve added… it’s nothing but redaction! Doc 1 is quite juicy though.


Yes, just included for completeness, really. And it does show that his lawyers have a copy of the settlement agreement; there had been some speculation here that they didn't know what was in it.


----------



## scalyboy (Nov 1, 2021)

Athos said:


> This might be of interest.


Thanks for uploading this. 

Some weird double-talk in the first two paragraphs:

“_Virginia Giuffre may well be a victim of sexual abuse at the hands of Jeffrey Epstein (“Epstein”), and nothing can excuse, nor fully capture, the abhorrence and gravity of Epstein’s monstrous behavior against Giuffre
…
For over a decade, Giuffre has profited from her allegations against Epstein and others 
…
Most people could only dream of obtaining the sums of money that Giuffre has secured for herself over the years. This presents a compelling motive for Giuffre to continue filing frivolous lawsuits_…”

So his lawyers concede that VG “may well” have been a victim of sexual abuse, but that doesn’t prevent them from attacking her for having “profited” from “frivolous” lawsuits.

If - as they state - VG has obtained sums of money that most can only dream of, she must now be quite wealthy. So by implication her motive for continuing to file such lawsuits must be sheer, unadulterated greed.

To me, it comes across as an extraordinarily offensive and aggressively-worded document, and I would hazard a guess it will further denigrate the UK public’s view of him.

Seems to me to be a PR disaster, not unlike the Met’s recent PR handling of the fallout from the Couzens case.


----------



## MickiQ (Nov 1, 2021)

I want to know more about the Spitting Image puppet, is he now going to start claming that the picture of her posing with him is really a picture of her posing with his Spitting Image puppet?


----------



## bluescreen (Nov 1, 2021)

Athos said:


> Yes, just included for completeness, really. And it does show that his lawyers have a copy of the settlement agreement; there had been some speculation here that they didn't know what was in it.


From all the arguments I infer that Andrew isn't named in the settlement agreement. No doubt he agonised at the time over whether that would be incriminating in itself or whether it would let him off.


----------



## Athos (Nov 1, 2021)

scalyboy said:


> Thanks for uploading this.
> 
> Some weird double-talk in the first two paragraphs:
> 
> ...


Yeah, done himself no favors at all.

I guess a lot will turn on the court's interpretation of the settlement and release agreement, in particular whether or not it covers him - both the question of whether he's in scope and that if where he had standing to rely on it as a third party.  It looks like it covered Dershowitz, and that's why she had to drop the claim against him; I fear it might be the same here.


----------



## Athos (Nov 1, 2021)

bluescreen said:


> From all the arguments I infer that Andrew isn't named in the settlement agreement. No doubt he agonised at the time over whether that would be incriminating in itself or whether it would let him off.


That appears to be true; he seems to be relying on the fact that he'd already been identified by her in the Epstein proceedings, and that he's captured in (at least) one of the classes of people included in the release agreement i.e. "royalty."


----------



## Chilli.s (Nov 1, 2021)

Doesn't seem to be saying he never met her anymore, just didn't break the law.



scalyboy said:


> To me, it comes across as an extraordinarily offensive and aggressively-worded document, and I would hazard a guess it will further denigrate the UK public’s view of him.



Agree, it is a totally offensive standpoint

If he had any scruples he'd applaud someone for recovering from abuse and bringing lawbreaking to the public eye


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 1, 2021)

Athos said:


> Yeah, done himself no favors at all.
> 
> I guess a lot will turn on the court's interpretation of the settlement and release agreement, in particular whether or not it covers him.  It looks like it covered Derschowitz, and that's why she had to drop the claim against him; I fear it might be the same here.




I seem to recall that Dershowitz was covered as the agreement was for Epstein and his legal advisors.


----------



## Athos (Nov 1, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I seem to recall that Dershowitz was covered as the agreement was for Epstein and his legal advisors.


I don't think any of know the terms of the agreement, which makes it very hard to compare how clearly Derchowitz was covered by it compared to Andrew.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 1, 2021)

Right charmers. Tact free shitbags. Andrew nonce agreed to this wording. What utter shit he is


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 1, 2021)

scalyboy said:


> Thanks for uploading this.
> 
> Some weird double-talk in the first two paragraphs:
> 
> ...


the met seem to contain many couzens


----------



## bluescreen (Nov 1, 2021)

I know nothing about US law. Is there a good reason why Andrew is employing attorneys from LA in an action based in NY?  Presumably they are qualified at the NY bar, but one would have thought NY attorneys a more obvious choice.


----------



## Athos (Nov 1, 2021)

bluescreen said:


> I know nothing about US law. Is there a good reason why Andrew is employing attorneys from LA in an action based in NY?  Presumably they are qualified at the NY bar, but one would have thought NY attorneys a more obvious choice.


The firm has a lot of experience representing high-profile people (typically Hollywood stars) accused of this sort of thing.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 1, 2021)

bluescreen said:


> I know nothing about US law. Is there a good reason why Andrew is employing attorneys from LA in an action based in NY?  Presumably they are qualified at the NY bar, but one would have thought NY attorneys a more obvious choice.




Specialists in representing nonces.


----------



## bluescreen (Nov 1, 2021)

Athos said:


> The firm has a lot of experience representing high-profile people (typically Hollywood stars) accused of this sort of thing.


Ah, OK. I don't expect there would be many NY firms with that sort of expertise...


----------



## DaveCinzano (Nov 1, 2021)

Pederast Andrew-adjacent news:


> Barclays chief executive Jes Staley is stepping down after an investigation by the City watchdog over his links to the sex offender and disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein.





> The bank said the investigation did not conclude that Staley “saw, or was aware of, any of Mr Epstein’s alleged crimes, which was the central question underpinning Barclays’ support for Mr Staley following the arrest of Mr Epstein in the summer of 2019.”











						Barclays chief Jes Staley steps down after Epstein investigation
					

Executive plans to challenge findings of FCA inquiry and will be replaced by CS Venkatakrishnan




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 1, 2021)

bluescreen said:


> Ah, OK. I don't expect there would be many NY firms with that sort of expertise...


i thought there'd be loads


----------



## dessiato (Nov 1, 2021)

Totally unrelated to the thread, 

bluescreen your tagline translates as "I is another.  Je suis un autre is "I am another."

Pedant mode will now be turned off.


----------



## Athos (Nov 1, 2021)

dessiato said:


> Totally understand related to the thread,
> 
> bluescreen your tagline translates as "I is another.  Je suis un autre is "I am another."
> 
> Pedant mode will now be turned off.


It's a Rimbaud quote.


----------



## bluescreen (Nov 1, 2021)

dessiato said:


> Totally understand related to the thread,
> 
> bluescreen your tagline translates as "I is another.  Je suis un autre is "I am another."
> 
> Pedant mode will now be turned off.


my tagline, which sounds ungrammatical, is a quote from Rimbaud referring to the first person in poetry. 
/derail


----------



## dessiato (Nov 1, 2021)

Athos said:


> It's a Rimbaud quote.


I didn't recognise it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 1, 2021)

dessiato said:


> Totally unrelated to the thread,
> 
> bluescreen your tagline translates as "I is another.  Je suis un autre is "I am another."
> 
> Pedant mode will now be turned off.


his tagline should be another line from rambo, 'they drew first blood'


----------



## bluescreen (Nov 1, 2021)

Don't push it


----------



## Athos (Nov 1, 2021)




----------



## Raheem (Nov 1, 2021)

Anyone for a game of Have I Got News For You?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 1, 2021)

a Fucking Knobhead & Nonce


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Nov 1, 2021)

not-bono-ever said:


> Right charmers. Tact free shitbags. Andrew nonce agreed to this wording. What utter shit he is


Yes which implies that that is what he really thinks of her. The absolute shit.


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 1, 2021)

It's absolutely disgusting how Virginia Guiffre is being referred to in the court documents. And as for profiting from the wealthy, wealthy people have abused her to the extent that she suffers from severe PTSD and cannot work. Christ.


----------



## MickiQ (Nov 1, 2021)

The man is the undisputed expert on how to look bad in the public eye, Instead of a single line and sticking to it, his defence oscillates randomly between "I Never Met Her, It's a Pack of Lies', 'She Wasn't Coerced, She's A Gold Digger' and 'Well It's Already Settled'. I dunno what he's paying these lawyers but either they're taking him for a ride or he's doing a Trump and ignoring every bit of advice they give him.


----------



## xenon (Nov 1, 2021)

bluescreen said:


> my tagline, which sounds ungrammatical, is a quote from Rimbaud referring to the first person in poetry.
> /derail



First Blood part 2 yeah? * nods *


----------



## Athos (Nov 1, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> The man is the undisputed expert on how to look bad in the public eye, Instead of a single line and sticking to it, his defence oscillates randomly between "I Never Met Her, It's a Pack of Lies', 'She Wasn't Coerced, She's A Gold Digger' and 'Well It's Already Settled'. I dunno what he's paying these lawyers but either they're taking him for a ride or he's doing a Trump and ignoring every bit of advice they give him.


I suspect he's actually following their advice. The 'gloves off and throw the kitchen sink at her' are this firm's speciality, and a common US approach to civil litigation.


----------



## tim (Nov 1, 2021)

,





Athos said:


> I suspect he's actually following their advice. The 'gloves off and throw the kitchen sink at her' are this firm's speciality, and a common US approach to civil litigation.



Hardly surprising that, after 95 years of moderation, Brenda's now drowning her sorrows in alcohol


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 1, 2021)

Raheem said:


> Anyone for a game of Have I Got News For You?
> 
> View attachment 295109


a well-known pederast?


----------



## Wilf (Nov 1, 2021)

Athos said:


> This might be of interest.


On a speed read of the main document, they don't seem to be challenging the authenticity of the photographs. Also, I didn't see an outright denial that he had met her.


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 1, 2021)

Athos said:


> I suspect he's actually following their advice. The 'gloves off and throw the kitchen sink at her' are this firm's speciality, and a common US approach to civil litigation.


It might be common but it's still disgusting.


----------



## Athos (Nov 1, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> It might be common but it's still disgusting.


Yes, utterly vile.


----------



## Athos (Nov 1, 2021)

Wilf said:


> On a speed read of the main document, they don't seem to be challenging the authenticity of the photographs. Also, I didn't see an outright denial that he had met her.


I didn't see anything to that effect. I suspect that, if it goes that far*, he'll maintain the line that he had no *recollection* of meeting her (to avoid giving a hostage to fortune), and not admit the authenticity of the photos.  I guess he could probably find an expert witness who'd say they could be a fake, but not sure he'd bother, given they don't prove anything anyway.

*I doubt it'll get as far as being disputed on the substantive evidence - the claim will be barred as a result of the previous agreement, or there'll be a jurisdictional challenge, or he'll settle, or allow judgement in default on the basis it can't be enforced against him in the UK.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 1, 2021)

Athos said:


> I didn't see anything to that effect. I suspect that, if it goes that far*, he'll maintain the line that he had no *recollection* of meeting her (to avoid giving a hostage to fortune), and not admit the authenticity of the photos.  I guess he could probably find an expert witness who'd say they could be a fake, but not sure he'd bother, given they don't prove anything anyway.
> 
> *I doubt it'll get as far as being disputed on the substantive evidence - the claim will be barred as a result of the previous agreement, or there'll be a jurisdictional challenge, or he'll settle, or allow judgement in default on the basis it can't be enforced agadir him in the UK.


Yep, I'm sure you are right and the previous agreement is the point where this process stops.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 1, 2021)

It’s gonna be a festive Xmas in the Andy Battenburg nosweater household. All the gang will be there , playing charades, pulling crackers , eating Xmas pud. And every time they look at Andrew , it will be written on their expressive faces - nonce.


----------



## two sheds (Nov 1, 2021)

I trust his objectionable statements will add to any money he has to pay in settlement.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 1, 2021)

not-bono-ever said:


> It’s gonna be a festive Xmas in the Andy Battenburg nosweater household. All the gang will be there , playing charades, pulling crackers , eating Xmas pud. And every time they look at Andrew , it will be written on their expressive faces - nonce.


Prince Philip has shown his displeasure by arranging to be elsewhere at Christmas


----------



## MickiQ (Nov 1, 2021)

not-bono-ever said:


> It’s gonna be a festive Xmas in the Andy Battenburg nosweater household. All the gang will be there , playing charades, pulling crackers , eating Xmas pud. And every time they look at Andrew , it will be written on their expressive faces - nonce.


Don't they always go to church on Xmas Day? I wonder if Brenda will touch on it during her speech might watch it this year if she does.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 1, 2021)

Annus noncus miserablus


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 1, 2021)

Athos said:


> allow judgement in default on the basis it can't be enforced against him in the UK.



If the outcome is a judgement that he must pay $X to her, that would be a debt that is enforceable in the UK, no?


----------



## Chilli.s (Nov 1, 2021)

It does say that that picture was hers to sell to the press, wonder if she has more, also lots of "well she went on to do ..."  which although fairly grubby isn't justification or protection from anything

Don't think It'll stop her publishing a book in the future


----------



## Athos (Nov 1, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> If the outcome is a judgement that he must pay $X to her, that would be a debt that is enforceable in the UK, no?


Not necessarily.

It would only be enforceable if he couldn't demonstrate that it fails to satisfy six conditions.  The most difficult for her would be jurisdiction. Since he wasn't in the US when proceedings were served, she'd effectively have to establish he submitted to jurisdiction through prior agreement or voluntary engagement with proceedings.  Also, the bulk of any damages she would be awarded in a US court would most likely be punitive, which would probably it unenforceable here, as a matter of public policy.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 1, 2021)

not-bono-ever said:


> It’s gonna be a festive Xmas in the Andy Battenburg nosweater household. All the gang will be there , playing charades, pulling crackers , eating Xmas pud. And every time they look at Andrew , it will be written on their expressive faces - nonce.


Wonder if they still remember uncle Louis with affection?  Seem to recall one of Charlie's senior flunkies was also accused of raping a junior flunky a few years back.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 1, 2021)

Wilf said:


> Wonder if they still remember uncle Louis with affection?


or his bequests anyway


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 1, 2021)

They are all well dysfunctional


----------



## TopCat (Nov 1, 2021)

I cant recollect the rumours about the blown up one.


----------



## Athos (Nov 1, 2021)

TopCat said:


> I cant recollect the rumours about the blown up one.


That he used to molest local Irish boys on his boat.


----------



## Sue (Nov 1, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> Don't they always go to church on Xmas Day? I wonder if Brenda will touch on it during her speech might watch it this year if she does.


Of course not. Why would she?


----------



## TopCat (Nov 1, 2021)

Athos said:


> That he used to molest local Irish boys on his boat.


Horrible dead cunt that he is.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Nov 1, 2021)

TopCat said:


> I cant recollect the rumours about the blown up one.


He had dandruff?


----------



## Athos (Nov 1, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> He had dandruff?


His Head & Shoulders washed up on the beach?


----------



## Saul Goodman (Nov 1, 2021)

Athos said:


> His Head & Shoulders washed up on the beach?


That's the one.


----------



## seeformiles (Nov 1, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> Shan’t



A very Enid Blyton response but I like it 🙂


----------



## TopCat (Nov 1, 2021)

Prince Andrew’s criticisms of Virginia Giuffre may backfire, lawyers say
					

UK experts say accusing Giuffre of seeking a ‘payday’ at prince’s expense is risky




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Sue (Nov 1, 2021)

TopCat said:


> Prince Andrew’s criticisms of Virginia Giuffre may backfire, lawyers say
> 
> 
> UK experts say accusing Giuffre of seeking a ‘payday’ at prince’s expense is risky
> ...


No shit.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 1, 2021)

"Whether or not she was complicit in assisting Epstein with his child abuse is neither here nor there when you consider the allegations against Prince Andrew, which are that he raped and molested her. However he tarnishes her character, it makes absolutely no difference to that issue.”


----------



## andysays (Nov 1, 2021)

Sue said:


> No shit.


Not sure we needed any "experts" to confirm what everyone on this thread has been saying already...


----------



## TopCat (Nov 1, 2021)

andysays said:


> Not sure we needed any "experts" to confirm what everyone on this thread has been saying already...


The same views increasingly resonate.


----------



## 1927 (Nov 1, 2021)

TopCat said:


> "Whether or not she was complicit in assisting Epstein with his child abuse is neither here nor there when you consider the allegations against Prince Andrew, which are that he raped and molested her. However he tarnishes her character, it makes absolutely no difference to that issue.”


I think they are trying to say that she wasn't coerced into having sex as she was in effect a coconspirator with Epstein as she willingly recruited other girls to the cause, which seems a very strange thing to allege in this case, as if he never met her her part in the the whole thing is irrelevant! Its a very bizarre line of attack that they are pursuing, It s like a scatter gun approach and they hope one line of defence will stick, but the danger as i see it is by following certain lines of defence theres an almost implied admission that he did meet her and did have sex with her.


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 1, 2021)

And the fact that she was groomed at a young age as a vulnerable child has nothing to do with it, I assume. She has openly admitted what she was coerced into doing for Maxwell and Epstein.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Nov 1, 2021)

I’d like to think that the “oh but she’s just a slut” argument has long since died out. Clearly not for the wealthy. You’d think he’d have learnt from his terrible interview but I guess he expects it will go his way as he’s lived a life where it generally does. And it might.


----------



## dessiato (Nov 2, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> I’d like to think that the “oh but she’s just a slut” argument has long since died out. Clearly not for the wealthy. You’d think he’d have learnt from his terrible interview but I guess he expects it will go his way as he’s lived a life where it generally does. And it might.


I think his position will pretty much guarantee he gets away with it. There's a lot of royalists in both the UK and US who will turn a blind eye towards his noncery.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 2, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> I’d like to think that the “oh but she’s just a slut” argument has long since died out. Clearly not for the wealthy. You’d think he’d have learnt from his terrible interview but I guess he expects it will go his way as he’s lived a life where it generally does. And it might.



I'm sure this 'argument' will have plenty of traction with the kind of horrid old arseholes who had been thinking exactly this about all women for decades. 

And of course the more backwards you are in your attitudes, the more likely you are to be a royalist.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 2, 2021)

Ghislaine Maxwell prosecutors can call accusers ‘victims’, judge rules
					

Defense team had requested word be banned during New York trial this month




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## dessiato (Nov 2, 2021)

TopCat said:


> Ghislaine Maxwell prosecutors can call accusers ‘victims’, judge rules
> 
> 
> Defense team had requested word be banned during New York trial this month
> ...


With luck this trial will start soon and we will get to the truth about HWCS. I'm still expecting he'll weasel his way out of it somehow, people like him so often do.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 2, 2021)

Attacking the woman who accuses you? It's no sweat for Prince Andrew | Marina Hyde
					

The prince has secured the services of a hardball US lawyer, says Guardian columnist Marina Hyde




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 2, 2021)

TopCat said:


> Attacking the woman who accuses you? It's no sweat for Prince Andrew | Marina Hyde
> 
> 
> The prince has secured the services of a hardball US lawyer, says Guardian columnist Marina Hyde
> ...




Bang goes her garden party invite.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 3, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Bang goes her garden party invite.



She's too old to get one anyway.


----------



## T & P (Nov 3, 2021)

So a late 2022 date pencilled in for the trial. I guess to spare the surely-deceased-by-then Queen’s blushes.









						Prince Andrew: US judge targets late 2022 for sexual assault civil trial
					

Virginia Giuffre claims the duke sexually assaulted her when she was 17 but he denies the allegations.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 3, 2021)

Casts a decent shadow over the whole jubilee shitshow


----------



## DaveCinzano (Nov 3, 2021)

Road trip to Paris it is, then


----------



## petee (Nov 3, 2021)

T & P said:


> So a late 2022 date pencilled in for the trial. I guess to spare the surely-deceased-by-then Queen’s blushes.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



btw boies is a heavy. she's got good representation there.

in the nyc press:

"Prince Andrew could be on the hot seat within two months, to answer questions in a lawsuit brought by a woman who says the British royal had sex with her three times starting when she was 16, the accuser’s lawyer said Wednesday.

Attorney David Boies, told a Manhattan Federal Court judge that he intends to swiftly depose at least eight to 12 people — including the Duke of York — in his client Virginia Giuffre’s sex abuse suit."





__





						NY Daily News - We are currently unavailable in your region
					






					www.google.com
				




(sry about the link)


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 4, 2021)

Boies has form for particularly intimidating litigious tactics, for example he was a lawyer to Theranos and Elizabeth Holmes and his firm would regularly try to intimidate ex-employees into silence over the company's practices, including reports of having them followed by private investigators.


----------



## petee (Nov 4, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> Boies has form for particularly intimidating litigious tactics, for example he was a lawyer to Theranos and Elizabeth Holmes and his firm would regularly try to intimidate ex-employees into silence over the company's practices, including reports of having them followed by private investigators.



yes he does.









						David Boies: The Man Who Ate Microsoft
					

David Boies has racked up victory after victory, defending IBM, CBS, and George Steinbrenner. Brilliant and tireless, he may be the greatest trial lawyer alive. Yet somehow, when Boies led the government’s anti-trustsuit against Microsoft, Bill Gates, the world’s wealthiest man, made the...




					www.vanityfair.com


----------



## Athos (Nov 4, 2021)

I'd pay good money to see Boies cross-examine the Andrew.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 4, 2021)

Athos said:


> I'd pay good money to see Boies cross-examine the Andrew.


Will it be televised?


----------



## Athos (Nov 4, 2021)

Badgers said:


> Will it be televised?


I don't know what the score is re televising civil trials in the US, but, honestly, I don't think it'll get that far, sadly.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 4, 2021)

petee said:


> btw boies is a heavy. she's got good representation there.
> 
> in the nyc press:
> 
> ...



The link opens using a proxy server, full report -



Spoiler: Prince Andrew could soon be deposed in NYC sex abuse case



Prince Andrew could be on the hot seat within two months, to answer questions in a lawsuit brought by a woman who says the British royal had sex with her three times starting when she was 16, the accuser’s lawyer said Wednesday.

Attorney David Boies, told a Manhattan Federal Court judge that he intends to swiftly depose at least eight to 12 people — including the Duke of York — in his client Virginia Giuffre’s sex abuse suit.

“The number depends a little bit on who we can get and the timing of it,” said Boies. “Certainly, obviously, the parties. In addition, there are a number of potential witnesses, I can’t identify them right now.”

A lawyer for Prince Andrew, Andrew Brettler, said he intends to depose the same number of people.

Andrew, 61, who is ninth in line for the British throne, was served the suit on Aug. 27 at the Royal Lodge in Windsor. Boies filed the case under New York’s Child Victims Act on the last day it was possible.

Giuffre says the prince slept with her three times, starting when she was 16-years-old in the early 2000s. Their meetings were coordinated by late fiendish financer Jeffrey Epstein and his accused madam, Ghislaine Maxwell.

She alleges the sex occurred in Epstein’s Upper East Side townhouse, his private island in the Caribbean, and Ghislaine Maxwell’s London townhouse.

The Duke of York moved to dismiss the lawsuit on Friday, saying it was a cash grab.

“Most people could only dream of obtaining the sums of money that Giuffre has secured for herself over the years,” reads the paperwork filed in Manhattan Federal Court by Prince Andrew.

“This presents a compelling motive for Giuffre to continue filing frivolous lawsuits against individuals such as Prince Andrew, whose sullied reputation is only the latest collateral damage of the Epstein scandal.”

Judge Lewis Kaplan said he estimates the trial will be held late next year.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 4, 2021)

New York doesn’t seem to televise court shizz.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 4, 2021)

cupid_stunt said:


> The link opens using a proxy server, full report -
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Why won't the queen be deposed?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Nov 4, 2021)

petee said:


> yes he does.
> 
> 
> 
> ...





> Boies is a master at placing entire conversations or stacks of documents on his mental hard drive and then, with a cerebral search engine rivaling that of Yahoo! or Dogpile.


😂


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 4, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> Why won't the queen be deposed?



The answer is embedded within the question.


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 4, 2021)

I'm slightly ashamed of myself for hoping EiiR lives long enough to see her favourite son legitimately and publicly judged as a sex offender, then dies of a broken heart.

At least, I want to be because after all she's a human being (even the sex pistols agreed via that infamous double negative) - but at the same time, I'd happily see them all guillotined so too much shame would verge on hypocrisy.

_That_ smile in _that_ picture he 'doesn't recall', which is at the heart of the case against him, I want to see it wiped off his entitled, arrogant face. With sandpaper.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 4, 2021)

mojo pixy said:


> I'm slightly ashamed of myself for hoping EiiR lives long enough to see her favourite son legitimately and publicly judged as a sex offender, then dies of a broken heart.
> 
> At least, I want to be because after all she's a human being (even the sex pistols agreed via that infamous double negative) - but at the same time, I'd happily see them all guillotined so too much shame would verge on hypocrisy.
> 
> _That_ smile in _that_ picture he 'doesn't recall', which is at the heart of the case against him, I want to see it wiped off his entitled, arrogant face. With sandpaper.


she ain't no human being: the double negative used for purposes of stressing she isn't a human being. as with sir jimmy savile obe kcsg, john lydon knew then what so many of us have only more lately found out - that elizabeth windsor is a lizard masquerading as a human


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 4, 2021)

Some local authorities are threatening to kick tenant out of their LA properties due to the actions of their offspring. 

Here we have a single mother Living on state handouts with a dysfunctional family around her including  one mired is sex offending. We should kick them all out of their gaffs now


----------



## Saul Goodman (Nov 4, 2021)

Athos said:


> I'd pay good money to see Boies cross-examine the Andrew.


Lionel Hutz would run rings around Andrew.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 4, 2021)

not-bono-ever said:


> Some local authorities are threatening to kick tenant out of their LA properties due to the actions of their offspring.
> 
> Here we have a single mother Living on state handouts with a dysfunctional family around her including  one mired is sex offending. We should kick them all out of their gaffs now


i'd like to agree but don't, on the basis that it's collective punishment which would be used against council tenants in the future. on the other hand they have never visited south georgia and they ought to have an abode there, for their brief sojourn in the south


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 4, 2021)

he wont ever see the inside of a courtroom. But if the civil case is found against him in abstentia - does that mean he wont be able to travel to the US?

The real damage is reputational - a severe blow to the monarchy. Die hard royalists will defend him no matter what - but the majority of people will see him for what he is - someone who used their wealth and power to sexually abuse under age girls and whose status prevented him from facing justice.  That - and the queens impending exit - is as serious a threat to the monarchy as it has faced in many decades.


----------



## MickiQ (Nov 4, 2021)

This case won't do Brenda any harm, she's bulletproof. Her eldest son is a different matter though he lacks the veneer of international respect she has built up. I can well imagine King Chucky on his first state visit to the US and some reporter shouting up from the back. 
"What's the story with your nonce of a brother, Your Majesty"


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 4, 2021)

not-bono-ever said:


> Some local authorities are threatening to kick tenant out of their LA properties due to the actions of their offspring.
> 
> Here we have a single mother Living on state handouts with a dysfunctional family around her including  one mired is sex offending. We should kick them all out of their gaffs now




Single mother  🤣


----------



## 1927 (Nov 4, 2021)

Kaka Tim said:


> he wont ever see the inside of a courtroom. But if the civil case is found against him in abstentia - does that mean he wont be able to travel to the US?
> 
> The real damage is reputational - a severe blow to the monarchy. Die hard royalists will defend him no matter what - but the majority of people will see him for what he is - someone who used their wealth and power to sexually abuse under age girls and whose status prevented him from facing justice.  That - and the queens impending exit - is as serious a threat to the monarchy as it has faced in many decades.


To be fair he didn’t abuse under age girls!


----------



## brogdale (Nov 4, 2021)

Oh dear.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 4, 2021)

1927 said:


> To be fair he didn’t abuse under age girls!


as er the first post in this thread explains, 17 is below the age of consent in florida

have you read the first post in this thread?


----------



## brogdale (Nov 4, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> and you know this how?
> 
> as er the first post in this thread explains, 17 is below the age of consent in florida


and...


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 4, 2021)

brogdale said:


> and...
> 
> View attachment 295426



That's not relevant. 16 isn't "underage" in the UK. The relevant bit is that 17_ is_ underage in Florida.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 4, 2021)

Spymaster said:


> That's not relevant. 16 isn't "underage" in the UK. The relevant bit is that 17_ is_ underage in Florida.


But that's the law of consent; as a trafficked minor Virginia Roberts (as was) was raped as a child.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 4, 2021)

brogdale said:


> But that's the law of consent; as a trafficked minor Virginia Roberts (as was) was raped as a child.


you know auld spy, as soon as he sees me on one side of a debate he unerringly chooses the other


----------



## DaveCinzano (Nov 4, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> Lionel Hutz would run rings around Andrew.


"Isn't it true that you are IN FACT the Duke of Yorkies - the Yorkie being a well known chocolate bar - but you still claim not to know where the bar at Tramps is... And not only that but you also claim not to be able to sweat... Yet a well-known observable _FACT_ - yes, Prince Yorkie, I said _FACT_ - about warm chocolate is that once removed from a refrigerator it _literally drips condensation_ in a process called.... _SWEATING_! Are you really trying to tell this court room that you have never dripped condensation - never _sweated_ - after being removed from a refrigerator?"


----------



## brogdale (Nov 4, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> you know auld spy, as soon as he sees me on one side of a debate he unerringly chooses the other


I know...the cuddly old conservatarian cunt that he is!


----------



## brogdale (Nov 4, 2021)

That said, it's always surprising and disappointing to see Windsor's victim described as not being "underage".


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 4, 2021)

brogdale said:


> That said, it's always surprising and disappointing to see Windsor's victim described as not being "underage".


you mean it is always surprising and disappointing to see _the victim we know of _being described as not being "underage"


----------



## elbows (Nov 4, 2021)

I dont remember if this has been posted here before. The audio quality is terrible but it is possible to work out whats being said, and the facial expressions tell a story of their own. As is typical of the period, the audience reactions also tell their own story about attitudes of the time.


----------



## scalyboy (Nov 4, 2021)

elbows said:


> I dont remember if this has been posted here before. The audio quality is terrible but it is possible to work out whats being said, and the facial expressions tell a story of their own. As is typical of the period, the audience reactions also tell their own story about attitudes of the time.



Good find.
 I suspect he's still - in his mind - living in that era, and can't understand what all the fuss is about. Weinstein was the same, genuine bafflement at being tried, convicted and sentenced. They didn't realise (or chose not to understand) that times have changed.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 4, 2021)

scalyboy said:


> Good find.
> I suspect he's still - in his mind - living in that era, and can't understand what all the fuss is about. Weinstein was the same, genuine bafflement at being tried, convicted and sentenced. They didn't realise (or chose not to understand) that times have changed.




Weinstein's reaction to the guilty was priceless, "How could this happen in America?"


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Nov 4, 2021)

1927 said:


> To be fair he didn’t abuse under age girls!



To be fair! Lol

Just wait ‘til they’re nineteen and get trafficking lads!


----------



## 1927 (Nov 4, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> To be fair! Lol
> 
> Just wait ‘til they’re nineteen and get trafficking lads!


I wasn’t trying to diminish the wrong doing, but I understood the point of the case was she was trafficked rather than she was underage and was therefore raped. . I apologise if my post inferred that I didn’t think he was an abusive rapist  slimeball.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Nov 4, 2021)

1927 said:


> I wasn’t trying to diminish the wrong doing, but I understood the point of the case was she was trafficked rather than she was underage and was therefore raped. . I apologise if my post inferred that I didn’t think he was an abusive rapist  slimeball.



The age thing could be argued between UK vs where she’d been trafficked from I guess. 
But that would be down to consent and as she was trafficked is a moot point.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Nov 4, 2021)

Statutory rape in the UK is beneath the age of 13 IIRC but this is a bad road to go down here. Just because she was older than 13 (or 16) doesn’t mean she hadn’t been trafficked for abuse as a minor.


----------



## Athos (Nov 4, 2021)

1927 said:


> I wasn’t trying to diminish the wrong doing, but I understood the point of the case was she was trafficked rather than she was underage and was therefore raped. . I apologise if my post inferred that I didn’t think he was an abusive rapist  slimeball.


It's the fact someone is trafficked (and the person having sex with them knew or suspected it) that makes it a rape; trafficked women and girls don't have the freedom not to consent.


----------



## 1927 (Nov 4, 2021)

Athos said:


> It's the fact someone is trafficked (and the person having sex with them knew or suspected it) that makes it a rape; trafficked women and girls don't have the freedom not to consent.


That’s the point I was making.


----------



## Athos (Nov 4, 2021)

1927 said:


> That’s the point I was making.



Cool. It wasn't very clear, but sounds like we're all on the same page.


----------



## 1927 (Nov 4, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> The age thing could be argued between UK vs where she’d been trafficked from I guess.
> But that would be down to consent and as she was trafficked is a moot point.


A moot point in so much as she can’t have consented, yes?


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Nov 4, 2021)

1927 said:


> A moot point in so much as she can’t have consented, yes?



If you were making the same point, a weird way of making that point would be to say ‘at least he wasn’t abusing underage girls’ 
But I accept you might have been clumsy in language as I am also.


----------



## tim (Nov 4, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> This case won't do Brenda any harm, she's bulletproof. Her eldest son is a different matter though he lacks the veneer of international respect she has built up. I can well imagine King Chucky on his first state visit to the US and some reporter shouting up from the back.
> "What's the story with your nonce of a brother, Your Majesty"


In the video address to the COP26 Jamboree, Brenda made a point of praising my eldest son and his eldest son.


----------



## 1927 (Nov 4, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> If you were making the same point, a weird way of making that point would be to say ‘at least he wasn’t abusing underage girls’
> But I accept you might have been clumsy in language as I am also.


Yes, I realise that my use of language wasn’t great.


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 4, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Statutory rape in the UK is beneath the age of 13 IIRC but this is a bad road to go down here. Just because she was older than 13 (or 16) doesn’t mean she hadn’t been trafficked for abuse as a minor.


That's not strictly correct.

Sexual offences with a child under the age of 13 is charged under a different part of the legislation than sexual offences with a child aged 13 to 16.





__





						Rape and Sexual Offences - Chapter 7: Key Legislation and Offences | The Crown Prosecution Service
					






					www.cps.gov.uk
				




Statutory rape is where one or both of the participants are under the age of consent.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Nov 4, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> That's not strictly correct.
> 
> Sexual offences with a child under the age of 13 is charged under a different part of the legislation than sexual offences with a child aged 13 to 16.
> 
> ...



Not sure how you’re disagreeing with me there. If a female is 13 or under she can’t consent by law so is rape regardless. If she’s above that but trafficked then it’s the same deal - she can’t consent because she’s trafficked.


----------



## Sue (Nov 4, 2021)

I'm pretty sure we're all in agreement here so...


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Nov 4, 2021)

Sue said:


> I'm pretty sure we're all in agreement here so...



Well have a word with EG who dives on anything I say please thank you.


----------



## Raheem (Nov 4, 2021)

Think the thing is it's not rape in law. English/Welsh law, at least. It's two separate offences, with different sentencing criteria etc to rape. You can call it rape informally, if you like, but people who have "consensual" sex with kids are never charged with rape.


----------



## mx wcfc (Nov 4, 2021)

Raheem said:


> Think the thing is it's not rape in law. English/Welsh law, at least. It's two separate offences, with different sentencing criteria etc to rape. You can call it rape informally, if you like, but people who have "consensual" sex with kids are never charged with rape.


I thought it was statutory rape if one of them was under 16?  In that someone under 16 cannot legally give consent?

You might be right about prosecutions, but is that possibly because they are going down for a fairly long stretch for sex with a minor anyway?  ie just CPS approach?  

I thought it was just that sentencing was  (rightly) harsher if the victim was under 13?


----------



## TopCat (Nov 4, 2021)

US judge sets January hearing for Prince Andrew lawyers in Virginia Giuffre case
					

Lawyers expected to argue for dismissal of Giuffre’s lawsuit accusing Duke of York of sexual abuse when she was under 18




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Raheem (Nov 4, 2021)

mx wcfc said:


> I thought it was statutory rape if one of them was under 16?  In that someone under 16 cannot legally give consent.


I *think* that the law doesn't actually say anywhere that someone under 16 can't give consent, only that it is a crime to have sex with someone under 16.


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 5, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Not sure how you’re disagreeing with me there. If a female is 13 or under she can’t consent by law so is rape regardless. If she’s above that but trafficked then it’s the same deal - she can’t consent because she’s trafficked.


It's not that 13 is the cut-off, the cut-off is the age of consent which is 16. There are different crimes for those who have unlawful sex with a child under the age of 13.

I don't jump on you for anything you say, but when you post things that are incorrect I am going correct any errors as I would for anybody else.


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 5, 2021)

I have a link to the legislation and statutes further up the thread, if you want to verify?


Raheem said:


> I *think* that the law doesn't actually say anywhere that someone under 16 can't give consent, only that it is a crime to have sex with someone under 16.


----------



## Raheem (Nov 5, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> I have a link to the legislation and statutes further up the thread, if you want to verify?


It's hard to verify a negative, so I'm not going to be any bolder than saying it's what I think.


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 5, 2021)

Raheem said:


> It's hard to verify a negative, so I'm not going to be any bolder than saying it's what I think.


Not really, you could see how it's written in the statute with regards to consent.


----------



## Athos (Nov 5, 2021)

I don't think the Sexual Offences Act 2003 says that people under 16 can't consent; rather it says that the fact they consented doesn't mean it's not a crime to have sex with them.

It's only considered rape if they're under 13; it's a different crime if they're over 13 but under 16.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Nov 5, 2021)

Athos said:


> I don't think the Sexual Offences Act 2003 says that people under 16 can't consent; rather it says that the fact they consented doesn't mean it's not a crime to have sex with them.
> 
> It's only considered rape if they're under 13; it's a different crime if they're over 13 but under 16.



Which is what I was trying to say but got ‘corrected’ on.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Nov 5, 2021)

It’s sex with a minor if over 13 and consent was given.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 5, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> It’s sex with a minor if over 13 and consent was given.


the whole point of an age of consent is that people below that age are unable to give consent: although activity by someone under the age of consent with someone else under the aoc can be a grey area






__





						Consent - Galop the LGBT+ anti-abuse charity
					

Consent means giving your permission or agreeing to something, in this case sex. Consent is the same for all genders and sexualities: if you want to do something sexual with someone, then both of you…




					galop.org.uk


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Nov 5, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> the whole point of an age of consent is that people below that age are unable to give consent



But it isn’t statutory rape unless they’re under 13.  
I don’t write the laws. 🤷


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 5, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> But it isn’t statutory rape unless they’re under 13.
> I don’t write the laws. 🤷


yeh but you can read them


----------



## Athos (Nov 5, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh but you can read them


And, on doing so, you'd see that, whilst sex with someone under 13 is considered statutory rape (s.5 - "Rape of a Child Under 13"), consensual sex with someone over 13 but under 16 isn't (s.9 - "Sexual Activity with a Child").


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Nov 5, 2021)

It still makes them a nonce mind but different sentencing.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 5, 2021)

Athos said:


> And, on doing so, you'd see that, whilst sex with someone under 13 is considered statutory rape (s.5 - "Rape of a Child Under 13"), consensual sex with someone over 13 but under 16 isn't (s.9 - "Sexual Activity with a Child").


there is only very marginal value to this post


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Nov 5, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> there is only very marginal value to this post



Might be useful to know when insisting someone on the internet is incorrect though.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 5, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Might be useful to know when insisting someone on the internet is incorrect though.


what, repeating back to me what i've posted?


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Nov 5, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> what, repeating back to me what i've posted?



Was I referring to you?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 5, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Was I referring to you?


you quoted me so it seemed like you were


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Nov 5, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> you quoted me so it seemed like you were



Not sure you were incorrectly correcting or not?


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 5, 2021)

Magnus McGinty if you have a problem with my posts take it up with me directly, not with snide comments or by taggibg other posters.

I took issue with your post and as you were claiming statutory rape only applied if the child was under 13, which is not the case. If you don't want your posts corrected, check the facts before posting. Quote your sources. And get over yourself.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Nov 5, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> Magnus McGinty if you have a problem with my posts take it up with me directly, not with snide comments or by taggibg other posters.
> 
> I took issue with your post and as you were claiming statutory rape only applied if the child was under 13, which is not the case. If you don't want your posts corrected, check the facts before posting. Quote your sources. And get over yourself.



But it is the case in the context of the point I was making. I’ve no idea why me saying that has annoyed you or why you appear to be singling me out for this kind of attention of late but then I don’t know the inner workings of your mind.


----------



## Athos (Nov 5, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> I took issue with your post and as you were claiming statutory rape only applied if the child was under 13, which is not the case.


I think you're wrong on this.  Only the s.5 offence - which is limited to under 13s - is classed as (statutory) rape.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 5, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Not sure you were incorrectly correcting or not?


incorrectly correcting is a contradiction in terms


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Nov 5, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> incorrectly correcting is a contradiction in terms



There’s oxymorons about.


----------



## Raheem (Nov 5, 2021)

"Miscorrection" apparently exists as a word.


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 5, 2021)

Athos said:


> I think you're wrong on this.  Only the s.5 offence - which is limited to under 13s - is classed as (statutory) rape.


I am happy to be corrected. I think I was getting confused between the statutes and what is generally thought of as rape.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Nov 5, 2021)

Thanks for the apology…


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 5, 2021)

For the love of God I am not singling you out.


Magnus McGinty said:


> But it is the case in the context of the point I was making. I’ve no idea why me saying that has annoyed you or why you appear to be singling me out for this kind of attention of late but then I don’t know the inner workings of your mind.


But your track record on these threads is not great, is it?


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Nov 5, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> For the love of God I am not singling you out.
> 
> But your track record on these threads is not great, is it?



I can be clumsy and a wind-up merchant. I’ve returned from an 8 month hiatus with the feeling that I CBA with bun fights anymore really. Maybe it was the pandemic but last year it affected my mental health. I know people will view me on my history but I am trying to post in good faith.


----------



## Athos (Nov 5, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> I am happy to be corrected. I think I was getting confused between the statutes and what is generally thought of as rape.


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 5, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> I can be clumsy and a wind-up merchant. I’ve returned from an 8 month hiatus with the feeling that I CBA with bun fights anymore really. Maybe it was the pandemic but last year it affected my mental health. I know people will view me on my history but I am trying to post in good faith.


Then as I have respectfully suggested before, think carefully about what you're posting on threads where women's issues are central to the discussion. Take care with language you use and the content of your posts.

If the events around Sarah Everard have shown anything, it's that many women have had enough.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Nov 5, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> Then as I have respectfully suggested before, think carefully about what you're posting on threads where women's issues are central to the discussion. Take care with language you use and the content of your posts.
> 
> If the events around Sarah Everard have shown anything, it's that many women have had enough.



I agree. And I don’t think I’ve been anything but respectful in my replies to you. Apart from the snide comments of course. But you must bear in mind that if I feel someone is needling me unnecessarily then I’ll slip back into form.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 5, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> Magnus McGinty if you have a problem with my posts take it up with me directly, not with snide comments or by taggibg other posters.
> 
> I took issue with your post and as you were claiming statutory rape only applied if the child was under 13, which is not the case. If you don't want your posts corrected, check the facts before posting. Quote your sources. And get over yourself.


Re read and apply to yourself eh?


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 5, 2021)

TopCat said:


> Re read and apply to yourself eh?


Good of you to join the debate.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 5, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> Good of you to join the debate.


You did single Magnus out, sanctimoniously, and given yours was a misinformed view it's churlish of you to not apologise,


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 5, 2021)

TopCat said:


> You did single Magnus out, sanctimoniously, and given yours was a misinformed view it's churlish of you to not apologise,


I did not. I also criticised Raheem.


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 5, 2021)

TopCat said:


> You did single Magnus out, sanctimoniously, and given yours was a misinformed view it's churlish of you to not apologise,


Well if I apologise now it's hardly going be seen as genuine and sincere, is it.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Nov 5, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> Well if I apologise now it's hardly going be seen as genuine and sincere, is it.



Ah just carry on. No damage done. I quite like that you’re holding me to account, even when you’re wrong


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 5, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Ah just carry on. No damage done. I quite like that you’re holding me to account, even when you’re wrong


Thank you Magnus, that's very gracious of you.

I apologise for holding you to account in a less than respectful way and will try to do better in the future.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 5, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> I did not. I also criticised Raheem.


Ah. A valid point I missed due to having them on ignore.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Nov 5, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> Thank you Magnus, that's very gracious of you.
> 
> I apologise for holding you to account in a less than respectful way and will try to do better in the future.



You didn’t need to apologise, but I accept and thanks. I more wanted compliments on my unintended almost-rhyme.


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 5, 2021)

TopCat said:


> Ah. A valid point I missed due to having them on ignore.


I'll take that apology now


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 5, 2021)

FFS, you two should get a room.


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 5, 2021)

cupid_stunt said:


> FFS, you two should get a room.


We absolutely should not. You take that back


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 5, 2021)

And look, this is the good stuff about urban, we can disagree or fall out or whatever, then it gets fixed and we move on. 

Remember p&p from 15 years ago? This is a teddy bear's picnic by comparison.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Nov 5, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> Remember p&p from 15 years ago? This is a teddy bear's picnic by comparison.


Can I get a countdown before first mention of _snowflake millennials...don't know they're born...down pit...but I was on a scholarship_...?


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 5, 2021)

DaveCinzano said:


> Can I get a countdown before first mention of _snowflake millennials...don't know they're born...down pit...but I was on a scholarship_...?


Oh no, I'm not saying it's woke millennials or anything, but p&p back then was just fucking carnage. It was hardcore brutal. 

It was epic.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Nov 5, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> Oh no, I'm not saying it's woke millennials or anything, but p&p back then was just fucking carnage. It was hardcore brutal.
> 
> It was epic.


No, I wasn't suggesting you would, but somebody definitely will sure as eggs is eggs and night follows day 😉


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 5, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> And look, this is the good stuff about urban, we can disagree or fall out or whatever, then it gets fixed and we move on.
> 
> Remember p&p from 15 years ago? This is a teddy bear's picnic by comparison.


Where are the other bears? Not much fun in a solitary picnic


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 5, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> Where are the other bears? Not much fun in a solitary picnic


I don't know where they are. Somewhere nearby I expect.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Nov 5, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> Where are the other bears? Not much fun in a solitary picnic



gone for a shit in the woods?


----------



## Saul Goodman (Nov 5, 2021)

elbows said:


> I dont remember if this has been posted here before. The audio quality is terrible but it is possible to work out whats being said, and the facial expressions tell a story of their own. As is typical of the period, the audience reactions also tell their own story about attitudes of the time.



It's amazing what you can achieve with hundreds of years of selective inbreeding.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 5, 2021)

Saul Goodman said:


> It's amazing what you can achieve with hundreds of years of selective inbreeding.


I don't want to watch it. I won't be able to get it back out of my head. Can someone already mind poisoned summarise please?


----------



## Duncan2 (Nov 5, 2021)

You don't want to know.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Nov 5, 2021)

TopCat said:


> I don't want to watch it. I won't be able to get it back out of my head. Can someone already mind poisoned summarise please?


I didn't watch it either. I was commenting on his face.


----------



## MrCurry (Nov 6, 2021)

TopCat said:


> I don't want to watch it. I won't be able to get it back out of my head. Can someone already mind poisoned summarise please?


Selina Scott opens with “now, about this nickname of yours” and then feigns embarrassment as though “randy Andy” is far too rude for her to say.  Andrew leers at her throughout, as though enjoying her discomfort. The audience react as though it’s all fantastically funny and in the end Andrew says the name came from him having been caught in the girl‘s dormitory at boarding school at age 14-15.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 6, 2021)

Urgh


----------



## andysays (Nov 9, 2021)

Ghislaine Maxwell to challenge accusers' memories​


> Ghislaine Maxwell will challenge claims that she groomed underage girls for the convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein to sexually abuse. According to a letter by her lawyer, the British socialite's defence will say her accusers might have faulty memories.





> The letter says that leading experts in psychiatry and memory would be brought in to testify in her defence. Ms Maxwell, 59, has pleaded not guilty to all the charges against her.



It doesn't sound like a great approach, but I suspect it's pretty much all she has available to her


----------



## bluescreen (Nov 9, 2021)

Oh god we'll have the ditsy females be ditsy females defence. 
Unbearable. A challenge to imagine what her own defence will be:
I was ditsy/they were ditsy and I forgot/I forgot they were ditsy/ditsy people forgot it was me, the mighty and unforgettable Ghislaine, doing things that people's memories are weirdly unreliable about.


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 9, 2021)

bluescreen said:


> Oh god we'll have the ditsy females be ditsy females defence.
> Unbearable. A challenge to imagine what her own defence will be:
> I was ditsy/they were ditsy and I forgot/I forgot they were ditsy/ditsy people forgot it was me, the mighty and unforgettable Ghislaine, doing things that people's memories are weirdly unreliable about.


Yeah, they can't all have unreliable memories..


----------



## Badgers (Nov 12, 2021)

Shameful of the Daily Wail


----------



## Saul Goodman (Nov 12, 2021)

Badgers said:


> Shameful of the Daily Wail



Photoshopped, obvs. Nobody has an arm that long, and he doesn't even know where the bar is!... And it looks like he's sweating... Obvious realfake!


----------



## two sheds (Nov 12, 2021)

Looks like Cameron


----------



## eatmorecheese (Nov 12, 2021)

..or Eric Idle


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 12, 2021)

He's looking down the top of her dress, isn't he...


----------



## Saul Goodman (Nov 12, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> He's looking down the top of her dress, isn't he...


Yes.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 13, 2021)

From what I can understand she's going with faulty memories and using someone to back that claim up who Weinstein used to suggest similar. Can't quite remember how that worked out for him...



And if that fails she's going to suggest that she was a victim too, unable to not go grooming for Epstein as he had a halo that made her groom underage girls to be sexually abused.


All very odd as her brother is saying that she doesn't really like being in prison.


----------



## MickiQ (Nov 13, 2021)

TBF I think prison not being very nice is pretty much the whole point of it


----------



## TopCat (Nov 15, 2021)

Jeffrey Epstein’s shadow looms over start of Ghislaine Maxwell’s US trial
					

Arrested in New Hampshire last year, Maxwell is charged with alleged sex crimes, conspiracy and perjury related to Epstein




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## TopCat (Nov 15, 2021)

There is more









						Ghislaine Maxwell finally goes on trial after 15 months on remand
					

Associate of financier Jeffrey Epstein faces charges of sex trafficking and enticement of minors




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## TopCat (Nov 15, 2021)

Maxwell also claims her eyesight is failing and her hair falling out, while her guards repeatedly wake her by shining a torch in her face.

I got a beating from police and nicked ten years ago. They came and shook me every half hour for 48 hours to check I was not dead. It was useful at the trial. I said I was too dazed to answer questions when interviewed by plod.

Maxwell will make much of her torch shining hell I feel.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 15, 2021)

TopCat said:


> Jeffrey Epstein’s shadow looms over start of Ghislaine Maxwell’s US trial
> 
> 
> Arrested in New Hampshire last year, Maxwell is charged with alleged sex crimes, conspiracy and perjury related to Epstein
> ...




Cor, reading that, she's properly fucked.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 15, 2021)

She will be tried separately for multiple counts of perjury.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 16, 2021)

Ghislaine Maxwell jury selection strays into questions of cop shows and fishing
					

The British socialite is accused of sex crimes and conspiracy but questioning of jurors produced some lighter moments




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 16, 2021)

TopCat said:


> Maxwell also claims her eyesight is failing and her hair falling out, while her guards repeatedly wake her by shining a torch in her face.
> 
> I got a beating from police and nicked ten years ago. They came and shook me every half hour for 48 hours to check I was not dead. It was useful at the trial. I said I was too dazed to answer questions when interviewed by plod.
> 
> Maxwell will make much of her torch shining hell I feel.



Suicide watch init. Not unreasonable considering the prior 'suicide' of her fella.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 16, 2021)




----------



## equationgirl (Nov 16, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


>



Oh that's hilarious


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Nov 16, 2021)

Yes it's very convenient being the son of the monarch









						And yet more dodgy dealings… - Anarchist Communist Group
					

The establishment corruption revelations go on and on and are hard for us at the ACG to keep up with. One of the latest revelations involves Prince Andrew. It’s very handy being the Queen’s son, even it is likely that you’re a nonce. If you’re as embedded into the British establishment and...




					www.anarchistcommunism.org


----------



## Calamity1971 (Nov 16, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


>



Rose tinted sex pest spectacles


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 16, 2021)

Prince Andrew’s £1.5m loan paid off by firms linked to Tory donor – report
					

Duke of York and multimillionaire David Rowland have had a close relationship for some years




					www.theguardian.com
				




I have a past. and had dealings with some well dodgy people but HRH His Nonceness seems to be waist deep in a sea of ropey fuckers.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 16, 2021)

Questions persist over how Prince Andrew funded luxury lifestyle
					

Analysis: friendship with David Rowland has often featured in speculation over how duke has managed to get by




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 16, 2021)

I think saying 'questions persist' is a slight understatement from the guardian. I think it's clear he's been monetising his royal connections for years.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 16, 2021)

not-bono-ever said:


> Prince Andrew’s £1.5m loan paid off by firms linked to Tory donor – report
> 
> 
> Duke of York and multimillionaire David Rowland have had a close relationship for some years
> ...


It's quite the collection of allegations. 
With Ghislaine's trial commencing any day now the shit is looking unbearable. It reminded me (really) of hapless fools drowning in quicksand.


----------



## ska invita (Nov 16, 2021)

not-bono-ever said:


> Prince Andrew’s £1.5m loan paid off by firms linked to Tory donor – report
> 
> 
> Duke of York and multimillionaire David Rowland have had a close relationship for some years
> ...


he was a trade ambassador for the UK- theres few dirtier sewers


----------



## TopCat (Nov 17, 2021)

ska invita said:


> he was a trade ambassador for the UK- theres few dirtier sewers


Used to hang out with Kashoggi. Facilitate at a bad time.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 17, 2021)

ska invita said:


> he was a trade ambassador for the UK- theres few dirtier sewers




Which is what this ‘loan’ is about; he was promoting this private bank as he swanned around the world at our expense, was given an unsecured loan by same bank for £1.5m which was paid off by the owner of the bank. Nothing to see here…


----------



## Badgers (Nov 28, 2021)

What the Ghislaine Maxwell trial will hear and her charges linked with Epstein sex abuse
					

The British socialite stands accused of recruiting teenage girls for the late financier Jeffrey Epstein to sexually abuse




					inews.co.uk


----------



## steveseagull (Nov 29, 2021)

the Maxwell trial is to start any minute now


----------



## brogdale (Nov 29, 2021)

steveseagull said:


> the Maxwell trial is to start any minute now


presumably weeks of prosecution case; might not hear from her for ages/if at all?


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 29, 2021)

brogdale said:


> presumably weeks of prosecution case; might not hear from her for ages/if at all?


Still worth keeping an eye on the case, for the details of the evidence.


----------



## UrbaneFox (Nov 29, 2021)

brogdale said:


> presumably weeks of prosecution case; might not hear from her for ages/if at all?


At least it gets her out of her cell for a few hours.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 29, 2021)

UrbaneFox said:


> At least it gets her out of her cell for a few hours.


Up before dawn. Searched, chained, put in holding cell. Then transport to court. Back in holding cell. Then court. Then reverse. 
Ha!


----------



## brogdale (Nov 29, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> Still worth keeping an eye on the case, for the details of the evidence.


Oh yes, and we know which details we're waiting for.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 29, 2021)

I’m wondering what line the Guardian will go for when she is convicted. It can never be her fault. 
Blame Daddy and Jeffrey in mitigation I reckon.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 29, 2021)

TopCat said:


> Up before dawn. Searched, chained, put in holding cell. Then transport to court. Back in holding cell. Then court. Then reverse.
> Ha!



For a moment I thought you were referring to prince nonce, I am deeply disappointed.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 29, 2021)

I really can’t believe all she has got is they are mistaken and/or money grabbing sluts. If she has nowt else she is truly fucked.


----------



## MickiQ (Nov 29, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Oh yes, and we know which details we're waiting for.


I don't think Giuffre is involved in this case so unless one of the others makes the same claim she has, He Who Cannot Sweat is unlikely to get even a (dis)honourable mention. A lot of people are no doubt waiting for his name to come up but I think they'll be disappointed. It's possible that Maxwell might have some killer evidence that implicates loads of VIP's including His Royal Nonciness  but I would think that if she had she would have struck some kind of deal by now.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 29, 2021)

TopCat said:


> I’m wondering what line the Guardian will go for when she is convicted. It can never be her fault.
> Blame Daddy and Jeffrey in mitigation I reckon.


GHISLAINE: MY LOVELESS CHILDHOOD
 Convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell today opened her heart to the Guardian in her first interview since receiving a 35 year sentence. "I never had a chance," she said, "I have searched my entire life for the love my parents denied me, love I thought I got from Jeffrey." Continued on p. 35


----------



## Wilf (Nov 29, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I really can’t believe all she has got is they are mistaken and/or money grabbing sluts. If she has nowt else she is truly fucked.


Certainly cutting it fine to make a deal.

On the royal nonce: do we know, is Victoria Giuffre one of the prosecution witnesses?


----------



## two sheds (Nov 29, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> GHISLAINE: MY LOVELESS CHILDHOOD
> Convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell today opened her heart to the Guardian in her first interview since receiving a 35 year sentence. "I never had a chance," she said, "I have searched my entire life for the love my parents denied me, love I thought I got from Jeffrey." Continued on p. 35



My dad would never take me swimming


----------



## Wilf (Nov 29, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> GHISLAINE: MY LOVELESS CHILDHOOD
> Convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell today opened her heart to the Guardian in her first interview since receiving a 35 year sentence. "I never had a chance," she said, "I have searched my entire life for the love my parents denied me, love I thought I got from Jeffrey." Continued on p. 35


Dread to hear Nadine Dorries take on it.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 29, 2021)

Wilf said:


> Certainly cutting it fine to make a deal.
> 
> On the royal nonce: do we know, is Victoria Giuffre one of the prosecution witnesses?




No, she will only feature in the separate perjury trial.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 29, 2021)

Wilf said:


> Dread to hear Nadine Dorries take on it.


Faint


----------



## Wilf (Nov 29, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> No, she will only feature in the separate perjury trial.


Ta.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 29, 2021)

You'd think maxwell was utterly fucked and facing life. Suppose ultimately she's risking her future on the oldest lawyers trick: suggest the accusers are liars who were all getting free holidays, blame epstein, pull holes in their stories and hope that does enough to divert the jury from reaching the criminal threshold for conviction.  Not _impossible _she'll get away with it.


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 29, 2021)

Bit of a sob story in the Guardian, 'nobody loves me so I helped my boyfriend sextraffick girls (allegedly)' must be one of the thinnest excuses ever presented as a defence.


----------



## Duncan2 (Nov 30, 2021)

Thought the defence might have put more effort into getting the case thrown out as an abuse of process due to all the adverse press coverage.Her brother popped up on Radio Four and railed about this.Too late now I guess?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 30, 2021)

Duncan2 said:


> Thought the defence might have put more effort into getting the case thrown out as an abuse of process due to all the adverse press coverage.Her brother popped up on Radio Four and railed about this.Too late now I guess?




Tbf he has taken to the airwaves fairly non-stop in recent months, so he can hardly complain…


----------



## TopCat (Nov 30, 2021)

Ghislaine Maxwell was present when Jeffrey Epstein abused me, accuser testifies
					

Witness identified as ‘Jane’ alleges Epstein began sexual abuse when she was 14 and says Maxwell was sometimes in the room




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## T & P (Nov 30, 2021)

I don’t know whether this contradicts any claims the Royal sweatless creep might have made to date, but it’s good to see his name popping up at the trial regardless









						Ghislaine Maxwell: Epstein pilot testifies he flew Prince Andrew
					

The paedophile financier's pilot tells a court he also flew Bill Clinton and Donald Trump on the jet.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## Wilf (Nov 30, 2021)

Wonder whether this case will reignite the accusations made against clinton? AFAIK he hasn't been accused of abuse in an epstein setting, but he certainly has elsewhere.


----------



## Raheem (Nov 30, 2021)

Seems like it must have been a really badly run operation and none of the supposed clients actually got any sex. Maxwell should be prosecuted by Trading Standards after this trial ends.


----------



## MrSki (Nov 30, 2021)




----------



## spanglechick (Dec 1, 2021)

Raheem said:


> Seems like it must have been a really badly run operation and none of the supposed clients actually got any sex. Maxwell should be prosecuted by Trading Standards after this trial ends.


Is that supposed to be funny?


----------



## gosub (Dec 1, 2021)

I can't believe this thread took 170 pages get goimg.


----------



## krtek a houby (Dec 1, 2021)

spanglechick said:


> Is that supposed to be funny?



Am guessing that humour is a way of coping with such a grim and wretched situation.


----------



## Aladdin (Dec 1, 2021)

Raheem said:


> Seems like it must have been a really badly run operation and none of the supposed clients actually got any sex. Maxwell should be prosecuted by Trading Standards after this trial ends.



Not funny.

These were underage girls ...


----------



## seeformiles (Dec 1, 2021)

Reading the testimony of the women as reported so far I can see how they appear to have been targeted by Epstein due to their families’ financial situations and the opportunities they could offer their daughters. However their parents’ apparent sanctioning of regular unsupervised contact of Epstein/Maxwell with their children seems very strange.


----------



## TopCat (Dec 2, 2021)

seeformiles said:


> Reading the testimony of the women as reported so far I can see how they appear to have been targeted by Epstein due to their families’ financial situations and the opportunities they could offer their daughters. However their parents’ apparent sanctioning of regular unsupervised contact of Epstein/Maxwell with their children seems very strange.


Very strange? Look at Michael Jackson.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 2, 2021)

Sweaty nonce getting name checked every night on ITN news reports of the trial👍


----------



## seeformiles (Dec 2, 2021)

TopCat said:


> Very strange? Look at Michael Jackson.



I suppose they equally groomed the parents. I’m just trying to put myself in the position of a parent in this case and I like to think I’d be a bit suspicious as to their motives no matter how dire my situation and their power to improve it.


----------



## scalyboy (Dec 2, 2021)

Wilf said:


> You'd think maxwell was utterly fucked and facing life. Suppose ultimately she's risking her future on the oldest lawyers trick: suggest the accusers are liars who were all getting free holidays, blame epstein, pull holes in their stories and hope that does enough to divert the jury from reaching the criminal threshold for conviction.  Not _impossible _she'll get away with it.


If that's her plan it does sound desperate. Does anyone know if she was offered a plea bargain deal? Seems to me (and admittedly what little I know of plea bargaining comes from the Wire & the Sopranos) that might have been her best bet, for example serve an agreed 15-20 years rather than face trial and a  possible 60 years... or maybe a plea bargain wasn't offered? I imagine there are some cases where the public's outrage is such that no plea bargains are on offer.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 2, 2021)

scalyboy said:


> If that's her plan it does sound desperate. Does anyone know if she was offered a plea bargain deal? Seems to me (and admittedly what little I know of plea bargaining comes from the Wire & the Sopranos) that might have been her best bet, for example serve an agreed 15-20 years rather than face trial and a  possible 60 years... or maybe a plea bargain wasn't offered? I imagine there are some cases where the public's outrage is such that no plea bargains are on offer.




Not sure if offered one, have read several reports that she would never accept one as she is 100% convinced of her own innocence.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 2, 2021)

btw, most cases in the US are settled via plea bargain, exactly as you suggest, including multiple murder where you take natural life rather than death. It's a recipe for disaster as wholly innocent people regularly find themselves in a position where accepting 10 years in prison is by miles their best option, which means of course the actual perp is still free to carry on his business.


----------



## Duncan2 (Dec 2, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> btw, most cases in the US are settled via plea bargain, exactly as you suggest, including multiple murder where you take natural life rather than death. It's a recipe for disaster as wholly innocent people regularly find themselves in a position where accepting 10 years in prison is by miles their best option, which means of course the actual perp is still free to carry on his business.


As indeed are the vast majority of putative trials in the UK.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Dec 2, 2021)

scalyboy said:


> If that's her plan it does sound desperate. Does anyone know if she was offered a plea bargain deal? Seems to me (and admittedly what little I know of plea bargaining comes from the Wire & the Sopranos) that might have been her best bet, for example serve an agreed 15-20 years rather than face trial and a  possible 60 years... or maybe a plea bargain wasn't offered? I imagine there are some cases where the public's outrage is such that no plea bargains are on offer.



15-20 years isn’t great either if you’re knocking on sixty.


----------



## spanglechick (Dec 2, 2021)

seeformiles said:


> I suppose they equally groomed the parents. I’m just trying to put myself in the position of a parent in this case and I like to think I’d be a bit suspicious as to their motives no matter how dire my situation and their power to improve it.


People who groom and sexually exploit children look for kids who are already on the edge of falling through society’s cracks.  These girls will already have been staying out without notice, or have parents who aren’t especially present for whatever reason.  

Organised nonces don’t go after the kid who’s always home by 7pm and is on the academic track to being a doctor or whatever.  

By picking on vulnerable kids, nonces not only avoid too many questions being asked, they also ensure that if the child does report them, police won’t believe them or consider what was done to them especially problematic.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 2, 2021)

spanglechick said:


> People who groom and sexually exploit children look for kids who are already on the edge of falling through society’s cracks.  These girls will already have been staying out without notice, or have parents who aren’t especially present for whatever reason.
> 
> Organised nonces don’t go after the kid who’s always home by 7pm and is on the academic track to being a doctor or whatever.
> 
> By picking on vulnerable kids, nonces not only avoid too many questions being asked, they also ensure that if the child does report them, police won’t believe them or consider what was done to them especially problematic.


Yeh and for proof see rotherham


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Dec 2, 2021)

spanglechick said:


> People who groom and sexually exploit children look for kids who are already on the edge of falling through society’s cracks.  These girls will already have been staying out without notice, or have parents who aren’t especially present for whatever reason.
> 
> Organised nonces don’t go after the kid who’s always home by 7pm and is on the academic track to being a doctor or whatever.
> 
> By picking on vulnerable kids, nonces not only avoid too many questions being asked, they also ensure that if the child does report them, police won’t believe them or consider what was done to them especially problematic.



Or even put the blame on the child.


----------



## equationgirl (Dec 2, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh and for proof see rotherham


And Rochdale.

And many now-closed schools where paedophiles had positions of authority.


----------



## scalyboy (Dec 3, 2021)

Duncan2 said:


> As indeed are the vast majority of putative trials in the UK.


Really? D’you mean the police saying plead guilty and we’ll tell the judge you co-operated, plus by saving the time & expense of a jury trial you’ll get a lighter sentence? 
I don’t think that’s that’s the same thing. An English judge still determines the sentence whereas I understood in a US plea bargain deal the sentence is pre-arranged.
Or am I out of touch and the system here has changed?


----------



## Duncan2 (Dec 3, 2021)

scalyboy said:


> Really? D’you mean the police saying plead guilty and we’ll tell the judge you co-operated, plus by saving the time & expense of a jury trial you’ll get a lighter sentence?
> I don’t think that’s that’s the same thing. An English judge still determines the sentence whereas I understood in a US plea bargain deal the sentence is pre-arranged.
> Or am I out of touch and the system here has changed?


The judge is of course limited by the nature of the charge as it is put at the opening of the case.If there has been a glassing on a Saturday night the CPS will advise the police to prefer charges of Wounding with Intent fully expecting that the eventual outcome will involve the defendant being advised on the day of the trial to plead guilty to the significantly less serious charge of S.20 Wounding.The defendant avoids a situation where he could be looking at a life sentence,the lawyers can get on with all the other cases in the list for that day and significant expenditure of public money is avoided.


----------



## tim (Dec 3, 2021)

cupid_stunt said:


> For a moment I thought you were referring to prince nonce, I am deeply disappointed.


Contain your disappointment. Once Mama dies, it will be off to the Tower where a room temperature butt of Malmsey awaits.


----------



## tim (Dec 3, 2021)

This is Ghislaine's guide outlining the way that staff should defer and meet the needs of Maxwell and Epstein at his holiday home

DocumentCloud



> Bottled water and drinking glasses on both bedside tables.
> Gun placed in beside table drawer


Odd that a book outlining in great detail how underlings should behave has such a silly typo.

Most importantly, Ms. Maxwell must always have her copy of the Daily Mail on her desk and a packet of Hall's cough sweets in her bathroom cabinet.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Dec 3, 2021)

Imagine informing exploited staff where the gun is kept...


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 3, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Imagine informing exploited staff where the gun is kept...


Why no one ever shot him baffles me


----------



## MrCurry (Dec 4, 2021)

tim said:


> Most importantly, Ms. Maxwell must always have her copy of the Daily Mail on her desk and a packet of Hall's cough sweets in her bathroom cabinet.


She was probably a lovely person until that first, fateful day she picked up a Daily Mail and started reading.


----------



## tim (Dec 4, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> Why no one ever shot him baffles me


It would certainly have involved much less faff than garroting him with a ripped up bedsheet.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 4, 2021)

Duncan2 said:


> The judge is of course limited by the nature of the charge as it is put at the opening of the case.If there has been a glassing on a Saturday night the CPS will advise the police to prefer charges of Wounding with Intent fully expecting that the eventual outcome will involve the defendant being advised on the day of the trial to plead guilty to the significantly less serious charge of S.20 Wounding.The defendant avoids a situation where he could be looking at a life sentence,the lawyers can get on with all the other cases in the list for that day and significant expenditure of public money is avoided.




The exact opposite is true with driving offences, careless rather than dangerous is the CPS’s go-to.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 4, 2021)

Having read through the list of how things should be in his life I am cheered that he was driven to hang himself in a prison cell.


----------



## TopCat (Dec 4, 2021)

A cocktail party from hell: in court with Ghislaine Maxwell, the society princess
					

Week one of the much anticipated New York trial of Jeffrey Epstein’s ex-lover saw her big-money defence lawyers trying to outmuscle an underpowered prosecution




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## TopCat (Dec 6, 2021)

Second accuser says Ghislaine Maxwell asked her to find young women for Epstein
					

‘Kate’ testifies in Manhattan federal court that she was 17 when she met Maxwell, who introduced her to Epstein




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## TopCat (Dec 6, 2021)

Ugly reading.


----------



## equationgirl (Dec 6, 2021)

TopCat said:


> Ugly reading.


Have you watched the documentary that Virginia Guiffre did a year or two ago with some of the other women he targeted? That article barely scratches the surface. 

He targeted vulnerable young women with chaotic home lives. She helped him allegedly.


----------



## TopCat (Dec 6, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> Have you watched the documentary that Virginia Guiffre did a year or two ago with some of the other women he targeted? That article barely scratches the surface.
> 
> He targeted vulnerable young women with chaotic home lives. She helped him allegedly.


Not watched it. Not got the stomach, too triggering.


----------



## Dom Traynor (Dec 6, 2021)

TopCat said:


> Not watched it. Not got the stomach, too triggering.


That's why this is a good thread it's got all the details about Andrews and Ghislaine and their friend's latest problems and not too much detail on the actual crimes.


----------



## equationgirl (Dec 7, 2021)

TopCat said:


> Not watched it. Not got the stomach, too triggering.




I feel I have a duty to watch stuff like that so the people are listened to and heard, after many years of being ignored and dismissed.

I'm sorry it's triggering for you, the media coverage must be very difficult sometimes.


----------



## TopCat (Dec 7, 2021)

It’s a horrendous litany of damning evidence so far. I think the defence tighten her noose with every move they make.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Dec 8, 2021)

Well this is embarrassing. Although it's perhaps obvious who they were a guest of.









						Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein pictured lounging at Queen’s Balmoral cabin
					

The couple visited the estate as guests of Prince Andrew in 1999




					www.independent.co.uk


----------



## tim (Dec 9, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Well this is embarrassing. Although it's perhaps obvious who they were a guest of.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yes, Tony Blair.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 9, 2021)

TopCat said:


> It’s a horrendous litany of damning evidence so far. I think the defence tighten her noose with every move they make.



Not sure what a good defence would look like in this case tbf.


----------



## TopCat (Dec 9, 2021)

The details make me feel sick.


----------



## Flavour (Dec 9, 2021)

Balmoral! This is just getting better and better for the Royal Nonce


----------



## equationgirl (Dec 9, 2021)

So far just a log cabin at Balmoral...


----------



## seeformiles (Dec 9, 2021)

One of the NYP news vids mentions a raid on Epstein’s apartment and a vast amount of discs and hard drives recovered from several safes. I wonder how much kompromat is in there and who features in it? 🤔


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 9, 2021)

seeformiles said:


> One of the NYP news vids mentions a raid on Epstein’s apartment and a vast amount of discs and hard drives recovered from several safes. I wonder how much kompromat is in there and who features in it? 🤔


here is a list


----------



## Curiouscarl (Dec 9, 2021)

Yeah. Human trafficking is a bigger business than all other illegal items put together. 

The Prince has never developed emotions other than, lust, anger and pride.

He litreally does not see them as human.


----------



## TopCat (Dec 9, 2021)

seeformiles said:


> One of the NYP news vids mentions a raid on Epstein’s apartment and a vast amount of discs and hard drives recovered from several safes. I wonder how much kompromat is in there and who features in it? 🤔


Is this evidence still in existence?


----------



## TopCat (Dec 9, 2021)

Curiouscarl said:


> Yeah. Human trafficking is a bigger business than all other illegal items put together.
> 
> The Prince has never developed emotions other than, lust, anger and pride.
> 
> He litreally does not see them as human.


He doesn’t see any of us as human. We are subjects.


----------



## seeformiles (Dec 9, 2021)

TopCat said:


> Is this evidence still in existence?



I would love to think so but the mind boggles at the behind-the-scenes manoeuvring by those who stand to lose from their exposure - given how wide Epstein’s circle of friends were. I’d put money on such evidence mysteriously disappearing, misfiled, lost in a fire, etc. before it bites anyone on the arse 🙁


----------



## bluescreen (Dec 9, 2021)

seeformiles said:


> I would love to think so but the mind boggles at the behind-the-scenes manoeuvring by those who stand to lose from their exposure - given how wide Epstein’s circle of friends were. I’d put money on such evidence mysteriously disappearing, misfiled, lost in a fire, etc. before it bites anyone on the arse 🙁


I dunno, though. It would be worth a fortune. There must be masses of kompromat on masses of rich people. How could anyone paying for its destruction be absolutely sure someone else didn't have copies (especially including the person tasked with retrieving it)?


----------



## brogdale (Dec 9, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> So far just a log cabin at Balmoral...


Loving the montage images that accompany this sub-story:


----------



## TopCat (Dec 9, 2021)

Ghislaine Maxwell trial: images of socialite and Jeffrey Epstein released
					

The US attorney’s office has released photographs never before seen publicly showing the socialite with Jeffrey Epstein




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Wilf (Dec 9, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Loving the montage images that accompany this sub-story:
> 
> View attachment 299999


It's like one of those Spot the Difference competitions.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 11, 2021)

The evidence so far is pretty disturbing and really not looking good for her, all her defense has done is slag off those who have clearly been abused. Notice her brother has stopped popping up professing her innocence all over the shop now it has been laid bare what she was up to…


----------



## dessiato (Dec 11, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The evidence so far is pretty disturbing and really not looking good for her, all her defense has done is slag off those who have clearly been abused. Notice her brother has stopped popping up professing her innocence all over the shop now it has been laid bare what she was up to…


Wait till we hear a proper defence case. In my, limited, experience when the prosecution presents a case it’s quite convincing, the same when the defence presents its case. (I still think that she in all probability is guilty)


----------



## TopCat (Dec 12, 2021)

It’s tough to see Ghislaine Maxwell’s team toy with such sad, broken women | John Sweeney
					

Justice at work is difficult to watch when big-money lawyers go in hard as they try to discredit witnesses




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## TopCat (Dec 12, 2021)

last witness Ghislaine Maxwell gave me nude massage when I was 16, accuser says


----------



## MickiQ (Dec 12, 2021)

It's going to be worse when it comes to He Who Cannot Sweat, the whole case against him rests entirely on one person's word against another.
His lawyers are going to go all out to discredit her.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 12, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> It's going to be worse when it comes to He Who Cannot Sweat, the whole case against him rests entirely on one person's word against another.
> His lawyers are going to go all out to discredit her.


Yeh but Andrew isn't going to the USA so it's one person's word against someone too craven to attend court. One person's word against someone whose word can't be trusted. All they have to do is show the BBC interview and Andrew is toast


----------



## xenon (Dec 12, 2021)

He's doing the honourable thing and having his lawyers traduce his accuser and hiding at his mum's house.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 12, 2021)

Pickman’s Model said:
			
		

> Yeh but Andrew isn't going to the USA so it's one person's word against someone too craven to attend court. One person's word against someone whose word can't be trusted. All they have to do is show the BBC interview and Andrew is toast



Would like to like this twice for the use of craven 


Just play the bit where he can’t recall ever meeting her whilst the jury stare at the picture of him with his arm around her bare midriff. Job done.


----------



## TopCat (Dec 12, 2021)

Chubby fingers


----------



## brogdale (Dec 13, 2021)

Presumably, not the news channels?


----------



## Aladdin (Dec 13, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Loving the montage images that accompany this sub-story:
> 
> View attachment 299999




Cue queenie passing away shortly


----------



## Aladdin (Dec 13, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Presumably, not the news channels?
> 
> View attachment 300641


Maybe he will go too?
2 for 1 jobbie for the grim reaper


----------



## TopCat (Dec 13, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Presumably, not the news channels?
> 
> View attachment 300641


Great pic of the nonce. Sweating.


----------



## extra dry (Dec 13, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Presumably, not the news channels?
> 
> View attachment 300641


A car crash is upcoming, icy roads around Balmoral - groundsman stated He never hit the brakes!


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 13, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Presumably, not the news channels?
> 
> View attachment 300641


----------



## bluescreen (Dec 13, 2021)

He has to have that special motif on his sweatshirt jumper to remind him who he is.


----------



## TopCat (Dec 13, 2021)

danny la rouge said:


>



Not many people would want to be seen in his company now. His ex wife maybe and she is desperate herself.


----------



## TopCat (Dec 13, 2021)

Who would give him a pass? That Sheik who likes dismembering people?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 13, 2021)

King Juan carlos escaped to the sunny delights of UAE after he jumped ship.as did disgraced Thai politicians and random Afghan leaders over the years. Its still a haven for piss pot despots and corrupt shitbags. Its a fitting golden cage for these parasites. Andrew Nonce-Mountbatten would love it


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 14, 2021)

not-bono-ever said:


> King Juan carlos escaped to the sunny delights of UAE after he jumped ship.as did disgraced Thai politicians and random Afghan leaders over the years. Its still a haven for piss pot despots and corrupt shitbags. Its a fitting golden cage for these parasites. Andrew Nonce-Mountbatten would love it




Pricey though and the sweatless nonce has a cash-flow problem right now, and without his royal role none of the usual bent bastards will have a need to grease his palms…


----------



## Orang Utan (Dec 14, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Presumably, not the news channels?
> 
> View attachment 300641


CBeebies


----------



## two sheds (Dec 15, 2021)

> It comes as two judges in New York ruled that a secret Jeffrey Epstein settlement deal that Prince Andrew says shields him from a sexual assault lawsuit should be made public.
> 
> The deal was signed in 2009 between Epstein and Virginia Roberts Guiffre, who is suing Prince Andrew for allegedly having sex with her three times when she was 17.
> 
> He strongly denies the allegations.











						Ghislaine Maxwell lawyers file for retrial over juror’s revelations
					

Lawyers submit documents under seal requesting new trial after juror revealed he was victim of sexual abuse




					www.independent.co.uk


----------



## TopCat (Dec 17, 2021)

Ghislaine Maxwell’s lawyers call Jeffrey Epstein’s ex-girlfriend as a witness
					

Maxwell’s defense team rested their case on Friday, with closing arguments set to begin on Monday




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## tim (Dec 18, 2021)

Charges have been brought in the UK!

Yes, charges have been brought against a woman who had the audacity to tap the royal window. The story is behind a Telegraph paywall, but the picture shows a man who clearly has his concerns. It's also nice to know that, if one were to make a protest that didn't involve windows, he has a fairly rigid personal schedule.


----------



## equationgirl (Dec 18, 2021)

For one second I thought that woman was Sarah Ferguson...


----------



## Aladdin (Dec 18, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> For one second I thought that woman was Sarah Ferguson...


Yep...thought the same.


----------



## TopCat (Dec 18, 2021)

Driving the Range Rover, a free one the cunt gets every year.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 18, 2021)

TopCat said:


> Driving the Range Rover, a free one the cunt gets every year.


Looking forward to his last (specially modified) one like they did for his father.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 18, 2021)

tim said:


> Charges have been brought in the UK!
> 
> Yes, charges have been brought against a woman who had the audacity to tap the royal window. The story is behind a Telegraph paywall, but the picture shows a man who clearly has his concerns. It's also nice to know that, if one were to make a protest that didn't involve windows, he has a fairly rigid personal schedule.
> View attachment 301462



Superb photo that. Really gives the impression of a man who is not enjoying being alive at all. Which is good.

As for charges being brought, I reckon I'd take whatever fine it is for the chance to explain in court why I did it.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 18, 2021)

TopCat said:


> Driving the Range Rover, a free one the cunt gets every year.




Aston Martin is associated with James Bond. I can understand why their marketing department is happy with that.

Range Rover with child sex abuse. I don’t understand the rationale behind that one.


----------



## TopCat (Dec 18, 2021)

SpookyFrank said:


> Superb photo that. Really gives the impression of a man who is not enjoying being alive at all. Which is good.
> 
> As for charges being brought, I reckon I'd take whatever fine it is for the chance to explain in court why I did it.


He dropped a kiddie porn mag out of the window and the loyal subject was attempting to return it to his royal highness?


----------



## TopCat (Dec 18, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Aston Martin is associated with James Bond. I can understand why their marketing department is happy with that.
> 
> Range Rover with child sex abuse. I don’t understand the rationale behind that one.


From now on, nonce wagon.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 18, 2021)

And Maxwell in “the flight of her life” refusing to testify. An old maxim states that only the guilty refuse to testify in their own defence…


----------



## TopCat (Dec 18, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> And Maxwell in “the flight of her life” refusing to testify. An old maxim states that only the guilty refuse to testify in their own defence…


There did not seem to be much to her defence. Calling the women gold diggers,. slagging their upbringing, saying they had false memory syndrome (all of them) and no testimony from the defendant. I would say 8/10 guilty if it were the UK. But this is the US, a nation that let Cosby walk.


----------



## Aladdin (Dec 18, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> And Maxwell in “the flight of her life” refusing to testify. An old maxim states that only the guilty refuse to testify in their own defence…



Can she refuse to testify?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 18, 2021)

Sugar Kane said:


> Can she refuse to testify?




She has the right not to testify.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 18, 2021)

TopCat said:


> There did not seem to be much to her defence. Calling the women gold diggers,. slagging their upbringing, saying they had false memory syndrome (all of them) and no testimony from the defendant. I would say 8/10 guilty if it were the UK. But this is the US, a nation that let Cosby walk.



She paid a woman to come and say that abused people may have defective memories. The same woman who was paid by Weinstein to say the same thing about the women he raped.


----------



## TopCat (Dec 18, 2021)

Sugar Kane said:


> Can she refuse to testify?


Yeah and she has. The defence has concluded.


----------



## TopCat (Dec 18, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> She paid a woman to come and say that abused people may have defective memories. The same woman who was paid by Weinstein to say the same thing about the women he raped.


Yes that was some move that. The reporting mentioned Weinstein every time she spoke.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 18, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Aston Martin is associated with James Bond. I can understand why their marketing department is happy with that.
> 
> Range Rover with child sex abuse. I don’t understand the rationale behind that one.



Well Audis are associated with utter bellends and they still shift enough of them.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 18, 2021)

TopCat said:


> There did not seem to be much to her defence. Calling the women gold diggers,. slagging their upbringing, saying they had false memory syndrome (all of them) and no testimony from the defendant. I would say 8/10 guilty if it were the UK. But this is the US, a nation that let Cosby walk.


Heard on the radio that the much vaunted "best that money can buy' defence appears to have all but collapsed with about just 2 of their heralded 45 witnesses prepared to testify; over before Xmas apparently?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Dec 18, 2021)




----------



## kenny g (Dec 18, 2021)

scalyboy said:


> Really? D’you mean the police saying plead guilty and we’ll tell the judge you co-operated, plus by saving the time & expense of a jury trial you’ll get a lighter sentence?
> I don’t think that’s that’s the same thing. An English judge still determines the sentence whereas I understood in a US plea bargain deal the sentence is pre-arranged.
> Or am I out of touch and the system here has changed?


Yes.


----------



## MickiQ (Dec 18, 2021)

tim said:


> Charges have been brought in the UK!
> 
> Yes, charges have been brought against a woman who had the audacity to tap the royal window. The story is behind a Telegraph paywall, but the picture shows a man who clearly has his concerns. It's also nice to know that, if one were to make a protest that didn't involve windows, he has a fairly rigid personal schedule.
> View attachment 301462


What has she been charged with?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 18, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> What has she been charged with?











						Prince Andrew in security breach as police issue statement
					

The Duke of York's Range Rover was involved in a security breach on Friday, according to reports.




					www.birminghammail.co.uk


----------



## teqniq (Dec 18, 2021)

The police, so quick to arrest someone for for what appears to be 'disrespecting' royalty. Downing St parties? 'Nothing to see here, move along'.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 18, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> What has she been charged with?




Nonce-knocking.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Dec 18, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> What has she been charged with?


Not respecting priorité à droite de seigneur


----------



## pesh (Dec 18, 2021)

Breach of the beast.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Dec 18, 2021)

Some obscure slèaze-majesté offence


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Dec 18, 2021)

. . . what has she actually been charged with? (Not the joke answers)


----------



## brogdale (Dec 18, 2021)

ATOMIC SUPLEX said:


> . . . what has she actually been charged with? (Not the joke answers)


 "A 50-year-old woman, of no fixed abode, has been arrested on suspicion of using threatening/abusive/insulting words/behaviour to caused harassment/alarm/distress.

source


----------



## Aladdin (Dec 18, 2021)

brogdale said:


> "A 50-year-old woman, of no fixed abode, has been arrested on suspicion of using threatening/abusive/insulting words/behaviour to caused harassment/alarm/distress.
> 
> source




Can you be arrested for that?.
Crikey. 
That's interesting. 
Especially as where I work staff have been on the receiving end of that sort of behaviour for years.

Obviously the royals are a sensitive lot.....



Fucking scum


----------



## DaveCinzano (Dec 18, 2021)

Sounds like a s4 or s5 public order offence arrest, no charge at the time of the reports.


----------



## High Voltage (Dec 18, 2021)

DaveCinzano said:


> View attachment 301487


Surely, RAPE ROVER would be easier to do and more appropriate


----------



## DaveCinzano (Dec 18, 2021)

Have at it





__





						Photopea | Online Photo Editor
					

Photopea Online Photo Editor lets you edit photos, apply effects, filters, add text, crop or resize pictures. Do Online Photo Editing in your browser for free!




					www.photopea.com


----------



## rubbershoes (Dec 18, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> And Maxwell in “the flight of her life” refusing to testify. An old maxim states that only the guilty refuse to testify in their own defence…



It's more nuanced than that.  Some people would be terrible witnesses and their legal advisers try and keep them away from the witness box.  Some people are guilty and shouldn't give evidence unless they are a very accomplished liar.  

But others just get flustered or can't give simple answers and let their mouth run away from them.

I've seen more than one person destroy their own perfectly truthful and valid position because they're an idiot.


----------



## rubbershoes (Dec 18, 2021)

Smell my cheese, you mother


----------



## brogdale (Dec 18, 2021)

Talking of Nonce/Rape Rovers reminds me of this ...funny how the cunts are all too willing to seek out some evidence of some matters, but not others....


----------



## DaveCinzano (Dec 18, 2021)

rubbershoes said:


> It's more nuanced than that.  Some people would be terrible witnesses and their legal advisers try and keep them away from the witness box.  Some people are guilty and shouldn't give evidence unless they are a very accomplished liar.
> 
> But others just get flustered or can't give simple answers and let their mouth run away from them.
> 
> I've seen more than one person destroy their own perfectly truthful and valid position because they're an idiot.


I've been in a court room when a defence brief has put forward patently untrue (and easily checkable) statements which neither police, prosecution or judge picked up on, but which appeared plausible because the defendants didn't give testimony in which they would likely have flaked out or contradicted each other. [Not saying the lawyer knowingly put forward false statements as fact.]

It was balanced out by dodgy prosecution evidence, unreliable prosecution witnesses being picked apart on the stand, evidence of collusion between police (Special Branch) and 'victim' (large death-dealing corporation) etc. Acquittals all round, in large part because the defence case was unified and presented a reasonable narrative from the evidence put forward by the prosecution, and the prosecution case was nebulous and undermined by its own flaky evidence and witnesses.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Dec 18, 2021)

They won’t investigate his sexual relations with a trafficking victim so they won’t care less about gates.


----------



## High Voltage (Dec 18, 2021)




----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 18, 2021)

rubbershoes said:


> It's more nuanced than that.  Some people would be terrible witnesses and their legal advisers try and keep them away from the witness box.  Some people are guilty and shouldn't give evidence unless they are a very accomplished liar.
> 
> But others just get flustered or can't give simple answers and let their mouth run away from them.
> 
> I've seen more than one person destroy their own perfectly truthful and valid position because they're an idiot.




Fair enough, but I shall draw my own conclusions in this case, people with degrees from Baliol should be able to assert their innocence in a court of law with no issues, unless of course they are un-innocent.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 18, 2021)

High Voltage said:


> View attachment 301523


At least we now know his 'don't serve me any court papers' face.


----------



## pesh (Dec 18, 2021)




----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Dec 18, 2021)

brogdale said:


> "A 50-year-old woman, of no fixed abode, has been arrested on suspicion of using threatening/abusive/insulting words/behaviour to caused harassment/alarm/distress.
> 
> source


I would have thought a more sensible course of action would be to ignore it and not bring more attention to the nonse trial.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 18, 2021)

ATOMIC SUPLEX said:


> I would have thought a more sensible course of action would be to ignore it and not bring more attention to the nonse trial.



We're not dealing with smart people here.


----------



## pogofish (Dec 18, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> So far just a log cabin at Balmoral...



Nope - This was taken in either in the castle itself or one or other of the other houses associated with the estate.







They have several houses on the estate where they put-up the lesser/more problematic guests/nazi-connected relatives of Prince Philip etc to give them a bit of distance but the formal/plaid dress suggests this was taken at either one of the balls they host there across the year or dinner at the castle when herself is in residence, which is always a formal affair.


----------



## equationgirl (Dec 18, 2021)

pogofish said:


> Nope - This was taken in either in the castle itself or one or other of the other houses associated with the estate.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Oh dear. Not good for Her Majesty.


----------



## pogofish (Dec 18, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> Oh dear. Not good for Her Majesty.



Not all the Balls are hosted by Her Maj - Some, eg the annual Ghillie Ball are traditionally hosted by the Prince of Wales/other Royals - and you don't expect ghillies if you go to it.  Its usually big-name industrialists/funders/worthy-types.

TBH, there is always an ever shifting crowd of second-line guests/hangers-on etc at Balmoral when she's up there.  Most folk go to watch the Queen and her family/first-line guests going to and from Crathie Church on a Sunday but it can actually be more enlightening to see who is amongst the guests who don't qualify for the motorcade and have to walk to and from the estate.


----------



## equationgirl (Dec 18, 2021)

pogofish said:


> TBH, there is always an ever shifting crowd of second-line guests/hangers-on etc at Balmoral when she's up there.  Most folk go to watch the Queen and her family/first-line guests going to and from Crathie Church on a Sunday but it can actually be more enlightening to see who is amongst the guests who don't qualify for the motorcade and have to walk to and from the estate.


I suppose it was always that way, with courtiers moving in and out of favour.


----------



## TopCat (Dec 18, 2021)

DaveCinzano said:


> View attachment 301487


im nicking that and sharing.


----------



## two sheds (Dec 18, 2021)

pogofish said:


> Nope - This was taken in either in the castle itself or one or other of the other houses associated with the estate.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I think you'll find it was a straightforward shooting weekend.


----------



## pogofish (Dec 18, 2021)

two sheds said:


> I think you'll find it was a straightforward shooting weekend.



Every weekend is a shooting weekend at Balmoral or one or other of the shoots they lease on neighbouring estates in season.


----------



## TopCat (Dec 18, 2021)

I posted it up on facebook and it was gone within two minutes.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 18, 2021)

brogdale said:


> At least we now know his 'don't serve me any court papers' face.


That's his 'new trousers please' face


----------



## two sheds (Dec 18, 2021)

TopCat said:


> I posted it up on facebook and it was gone within two minutes.


bloody hell such an innocuous photograph, too, with the absolute destructive shit they leave up on the site


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 18, 2021)

two sheds said:


> bloody hell such an innocuous photograph, too, with the absolute destructive shit they leave up on the site


If it'd been a rw meme it'd have gone viral with fb's assistance


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 18, 2021)

pogofish said:


> Nope - This was taken in either in the castle itself or one or other of the other houses associated with the estate.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Say what you will about prince Philip but at least he fought Nazis. There's but one step from the queen to Hitler, through her uncle. I wonder why you're trying to make Philip the nazi connected one rather than his wife


----------



## pogofish (Dec 18, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> Say what you will about prince Philip but at least he fought Nazis. There's but one step from the queen to Hitler, through her uncle. I wonder why you're trying to make Philip the nazi connected one rather than his wife



Maybe because they were the ones that were feared to have potential for stirring negative public opinion in the UK post-WW2?  Whereas the Queen was largely seen as beyond reproach.

The Badens, Hesse's and Hohenlohe-Langenburg's were all well-known faces on Deeside over the years and I last saw Hesse and the Badens as recently as a couple of years back, before Lockdown.  So they still come here but keep a low profile.  They initially put them in BIrkhall until it was going to be disposed of but the Queen Mother bought it for her private residence then it passed to Charles on her death and it remains his residence today.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 18, 2021)

pogofish said:


> Maybe because they were the ones that had the potential for stirring negative public opinion in the UK post-WW2?  Whereas the Queen was largely seen as beyond reproach.
> 
> The Badens, Hesse's and Hohenlohe-Langenburg's were all well-known faces on Deeside over the years and I last saw Hesse and the Badens as recently as a couple of years back, before Lockdown.  So they still come here but keep a low profile.  They initially put them in BIrkhall until it was going to be disposed of but the Queen Mother bought it for her private residence then it passed to Charles on her death and it remains his residence today.


I don't give a fuck about that, nothing to do with my post where I wondered why YOU are trying to make Philip the nazi connected one.


----------



## pogofish (Dec 18, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> I don't give a fuck about that, nothing to do with my post where I wondered why YOU are trying to make Philip the nazi connected one.



I'm not - that he had Nazi-connected relatives is a matter of fact, as is Edward VIII that was to the Queen.

If I'm making any point, it is that the guest list at Balmoral has always had a few people at different levels who they probably don't want to make too much noise about.


----------



## tim (Dec 18, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> Say what you will about prince Philip but at least he fought Nazis. There's but one step from the queen to Hitler, through her uncle. I wonder why you're trying to make Philip the nazi connected one rather than his wife



Yes, but to be fair this is the English royal family. Uncle David would have had no compunction about having his usurping brother Lilibet, Margaret and the Door-Step Duchess slaughtered if it got him his throne back. Fraticidal slaughter is part of their tradition.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 18, 2021)

pogofish said:


> I'm not - that he had Nazi-connected relatives is a matter of fact, as is Edward VIII that was to the Queen.


 

Elizabeth and Philip were related so his relatives are her relatives. It's genealogy not rocket science.


----------



## pogofish (Dec 18, 2021)

Indeed - but he was the seen as being the one with the potential for upset by the British establishment post-WW2.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 18, 2021)

pogofish said:


> Indeed - but he was the seen as being the one with the potential for upset by the British establishment post-WW2.


These nazi-connected people allowed into the country. How much less frequently was the Duke of Windsor


----------



## pogofish (Dec 18, 2021)

They played the game and kept visits low profile in largely private places, whilst the Duke of Windsor developed a reputation for being indiscrete and holding his own "court" in plush London Hotels and the like. 

That might explain why?


----------



## equationgirl (Dec 19, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> Say what you will about prince Philip but at least he fought Nazis. There's but one step from the queen to Hitler, through her uncle. I wonder why you're trying to make Philip the nazi connected one rather than his wife


Well yes, but also his favourite sister was married to a high ranking Nazi. So I expect he may have had some complicated feelings about them.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 19, 2021)

pogofish said:


> They played the game and kept visits low profile in largely private places, whilst the Duke of Windsor developed a reputation for being indiscrete and holding his own "court" in plush London Hotels and the like.
> 
> That might explain why?


I always love it when someone posts a reply without quoting the post they're replying to, to get the last word in. Very passive aggressive


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Dec 19, 2021)

Not sure a quote is needed if you’re referring to the post directly above.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 19, 2021)

No big surprise that Pickman's model is so eager to defend his beloved idol Prince Philip.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 19, 2021)

teuchter said:


> No big surprise that Pickman's model is so eager to defend his beloved idol Prince Philip.


You'll have to point out where I've defended him.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 19, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Not sure a quote is needed if you’re referring to the post directly above.


I am sure.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 19, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> You'll have to point out where I've defended him.


I thought when you said he fought the Nazis you were saying something in his favour but sorry, I misunderstood and you think fighting Nazis is indefensible. Fair enough.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Dec 19, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> I am sure.


Well perhaps you work to different rules from everyone else which is odd, tbh.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 19, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Well perhaps you work to different rules from everyone else which is odd, tbh.


You're right, I do. If I'm in an exchange with someone I quote their post or tag them to let them know I've replied, don't care if it's a decent poster like you or a putrid windbag like teuchter, it's the polite thing to do as you can't guarantee they'll return to the thread otherwise. For someone who announced his uncertainty at the top of the page you seem to have made your mind up rather suddenly


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 19, 2021)

teuchter said:


> I thought when you said he fought the Nazis you were saying something in his favour but sorry, I misunderstood and you think fighting Nazis is indefensible. Fair enough.


That's a very sorry post

As you'll note I said at least pp fought the Nazis. He was on the right side in the second world war. That's not enough to make him a hero, and certainly not enough to make him my hero (for which you've not shown any evidence). Philip's record in the war is a matter of fact. When in the war his future wife's uncle was so well trusted that he was shipped off to where he could do no harm.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Dec 19, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> You're right, I do. If I'm in an exchange with someone I quote their post or tag them to let them know I've replied, don't care if it's a decent poster like you or a putrid windbag like teuchter, it's the polite thing to do as you can't guarantee they'll return to the thread otherwise. For someone who announced his uncertainty at the top of the page you seem to have made your mind up rather suddenly


It's just not something I'd give a shit about mate.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 19, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> That's a very sorry post
> 
> As you'll note I said at least pp fought the Nazis. He was on the right side in the second world war. That's not enough to make him a hero, and certainly not enough to make him my hero (for which you've not shown any evidence). Philip's record in the war is a matter of fact. When in the war his future wife's uncle was so well trusted that he was shipped off to where he could do no harm.


You told me I had to point out where you had defended him. Now you are wanting evidence he's your hero. Not only are you moving the goalposts but I never said he was your hero, I said he was your beloved idol. A very sloppy attitude to your work, I'm sorry to note.


----------



## equationgirl (Dec 19, 2021)

Pickman's model And did you see my post regarding his sister being married to a Nazi?

Was he on the side against the Nazis? Yes, but honestly I think it could have gone the other way, had his sister not died in an accident. He wanted to live with her, not be sent to Gordonstoun.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Dec 19, 2021)

I'd love to know the intricate difference between 'hero' and 'beloved idol' haha


----------



## teuchter (Dec 19, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> I'd love to know the intricate difference between 'hero' and 'beloved idol' haha


Probably deserves its own thread really.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Dec 19, 2021)

teuchter said:


> Probably deserves its own thread really.


I imagine they mean the same thing in most circumstances.


----------



## Raheem (Dec 20, 2021)

Something I picked up on the radio.

Most of the offending relevent to the trial is alleged to have happened in Palm Springs. None in New York.

Star witness for the defence was a woman who worked at at Epstein's New York office and said she had never seen any inappropriate behaviour from Maxwell.

The entirety of the prosecution cross-examination went:

Prosecutor: Have you ever been to Palm Springs?

Witness: No.

Prosecutor: No further questions.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 20, 2021)

teuchter said:


> You told me I had to point out where you had defended him. Now you are wanting evidence he's your hero. Not only are you moving the goalposts but I never said he was your hero, I said he was your beloved idol. A very sloppy attitude to your work, I'm sorry to note.


I'm so very sorry to hear that you have such great difficulty dealing with paraphrases and synonyms, it must make your life extremely difficult. Magnus McGinty take note, and remember it is wicked to mock the afflicted


----------



## tim (Dec 20, 2021)

Impressive barrel-scraping from the Daily Heil trying to link Andrew's elder brother to Maxwell. A photo of Ghislaine and some young women at a nightclub where Charles wasn't actually present, but which was taken after a film premiere which he did attend.









						Ghislaine Maxwell 'took three girls to Prince Charles after-party'
					

The child sex trafficking suspect, 59, is seen in a newly-emerged photograph sipping a drink while the three girls surround a City broker and his friend at the Red Cube club in London.




					www-dailymail-co-uk.cdn.ampproject.org


----------



## DaveCinzano (Dec 20, 2021)

tim said:


> Impressive barrel-scraping from the Daily Heil trying to link Andrew's elder brother to Maxwell. A photo of Ghislaine and some young women at a nightclub where Charles wasn't actually present, but which was taken after a film premiere which he did attend.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Also, good to know that it was _rich_ _men_ who were being victimised after all 👍


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 20, 2021)

James last was in the SS and we all loved him didn’t we ?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 20, 2021)

( probably not true but I’m sticking with it)


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 20, 2021)

Ah fuck. I as told this by a man in a pub once and never questioned it. It’s bollocks it seems. How much of the other stuff he told me was also bollocks ?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 20, 2021)

I don’t even want to Google shania Twains wooden leg secret now. 


/ derail - Man in pub lies thread in general now created


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 21, 2021)

Raheem said:


> Something I picked up on the radio.
> 
> Most of the offending relevent to the trial is alleged to have happened in Palm Springs. None in New York.
> 
> ...




Palm Beach, Florida. Not Palm Springs, California. Some people are trying to suggest that the trial is invalid as the offending mostly didn’t take place in New York. It’s a federal trial, not a state one.

Her brother and sister were filmed leaving court after the jury retired, neither so full of bluster now, barring a miracle she’s fucked, the judge has instructed them to find her guilty if she ‘consciously avoided’ knowledge of Epstein’s noncery.


----------



## TopCat (Dec 21, 2021)

Bet she is already missing the cashmere.


----------



## seeformiles (Dec 21, 2021)

not-bono-ever said:


> I don’t even want to Google shania Twains wooden leg secret now.
> 
> 
> / derail - Man in pub lies thread in general now created



My brother and me successfully convinced my granny that Bob Monkhouse had a tin leg, that it was one of the best kept secrets in show biz and that he hired heavies to intimidate/murder anyone who let slip about it to the press.


----------



## teqniq (Dec 29, 2021)

Desperate clutching at straws shit here:









						Prince Andrew challenges accuser Virginia Giuffre's residency status in bid to have sex abuse case thrown out
					

The Duke of York's lawyers have filed a motion that states Virginia Giuffre is not a US citizen as she has claimed, rather that she lives in Australia, and thus the New York court does not have jurisdiction over the case.




					news.sky.com


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 29, 2021)

Very desperate, they are trying to argue that by living in Oz and having an Australian driving licence she has somehow given up her US citizenship. Clearly the actions of a too honourable nonce.


----------



## JimW (Dec 29, 2021)

teqniq said:


> Desperate clutching at straws shit here:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Sounds horribly like it might work, presume their courts won't want the case if it's not their jurisdiction.


----------



## JimW (Dec 29, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Very desperate, they are trying to argue that by living in Oz and having an Australian driving licence she has somehow given up her US citizenship. Clearly the actions of a too honourable nonce.


Ah, still a citizen, then hopefully my fears unfounded.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 29, 2021)

My dad has a friend who has lived in the UK since the mid-70's. He's still a US citizen though and when he sold his house he bought when he first moved here he had to pay capital gains tax to Uncle Sam, imagine how much that was after 30 odd years...


----------



## MrSki (Dec 29, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> My dad has a friend who has lived in the UK since the mid-70's. He's still a US citizen though and when he sold his house he bought when he first moved here he had to pay capital gains tax to Uncle Sam, imagine how much that was after 30 odd years...


Isn't that why Johnson gave up his? To avoid paying capital gains?


----------



## MickiQ (Dec 29, 2021)

This smacks of desperation to me to say the least. She was born in California so deffo a US citizen, I believe you can renounce US citizenship if you choose but you actively have to do so, it doesn't expire and since both Australia and the US allow dual citizenship then becoming an Aussie one won't affect it.
He Who Cannot Sweat appears to view the trial even taking place as being the same as losing it. Suspect he might be right to, regardless of the actual outcome there will be finger pointing forever on the well established if legally unsound principle of "There's No Smoke Without Fire"
He isn't going to jail and any financial penalty might very well be unenforceable but any outcome beside total absolution is going to hang around him like a bad smell forever, he's just too much in the public eye for it ever to be forgotten.
Even if he is totally exonerated (which is still possible) there are still going to be lots that are far from convinced and a great many of the movers and shakers of the world are going to be unenthusiatic about being seen with him.


----------



## tim (Dec 29, 2021)

This is not about US Citizenship but about being a citizen of a specific  US state. US citizens living overseas can apparently lose their state citizenship and this may restrict some of their legal rights. Desperate but, presumably, the lawyers think it could work 
.....
Citizen of a State
The Fourteenth Amendment provides that American citizens are also citizens "of the state wherein they reside," but U.S. citizenship does not necessitate residence in a particular state.

Persons living abroad, for example, are citizens of the United States but not of any state.

One significant legal disadvantage exists for a person who is not a citizen of a state. The Constitution provides that federal courts can hear "Controversies … between Citizens of different States." The phrase "Citizens of different States" includes citizens of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands of the United States, and Guam. Puerto Rico is in the First Circuit, the Virgin Islands are in the Third Circuit, and Guam, Alaska, and Hawaii are in the Ninth Circuit. A person who is not a resident of a state or designated area, even if he or she is a U.S. citizen, cannot satisfy the diversity of citizenship requirement and therefore cannot bring an action under the Diversity Clause in a federal court.









						Citizen of a State
					

Definition of Citizen of a State in the Legal Dictionary by The Free Dictionary




					legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 29, 2021)

tim said:


> This is not about US Citizenship but about being a citizen of a specific  US state. US citizens living overseas can apparently lose their state citizenship and this may restrict some of their legal rights. Desperate but, presumably, the lawyers think it could work
> .....
> Citizen of a State
> The Fourteenth Amendment provides that American citizens are also citizens "of the state wherein they reside," but U.S. citizenship does not necessitate residence in a particular state.
> ...


Tbh I think they may have a point. However,this should have been the first argument they laid before the court. Not stuff about some alleged deal. Issues of jurisdiction obviously precede issues around anything else. So by bringing this up now they only look feeble


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 29, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> Tbh I think they may have a point. However,this should have been the first argument they laid before the court. Not stuff about some alleged deal. Issues of jurisdiction obviously precede issues around anything else. So by bringing this up now they only look feeble


And just to add, by arguing about other things first they have imo tacitly accepted the court's authority to hear the case


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 29, 2021)

She registered to vote in Colorado in 2019, but has had issues being physically present there in the past two years as travel has been somewhat tricksy...


----------



## TopCat (Dec 29, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Very desperate, they are trying to argue that by living in Oz and having an Australian driving licence she has somehow given up her US citizenship. Clearly the actions of a too honourable nonce.


Giving up US citizenship is a long and tortuous process and it’s not done till they tell you it’s done. It’s a tax thing.


----------



## Flavour (Dec 29, 2021)

The good thing is only a guilty person would try and throw the trial on such a ridiculous technicality and everyone knows it is a tacit admission of guilt


----------



## petee (Dec 29, 2021)

* bites nails *









						Jeffrey Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell guilty on 5 of 6 counts in sex trafficking case
					

A jury has convicted Ghislaine Maxwell, the longtime associate of serial sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, on five of six counts related to the abuse and trafficking of underage girls.  Maxwell faced a six-count indictment for allegedly conspiring with and aiding Epstein in his sexual abuse of...




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## ouirdeaux (Dec 29, 2021)

Guilty!

Or maybe not. 

* nails bites *


----------



## bluescreen (Dec 29, 2021)

petee said:


> * bites nails *
> 
> 
> 
> ...


But what is the verdict?


----------



## Part 2 (Dec 29, 2021)

Ghislaine Maxwell found guilty in sex-trafficking trial
					

Maxwell, 60, convicted on five of the six charges she faced as US prosecutors hail verdict and say ‘justice has been done’




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 29, 2021)

petee said:


> * bites nails *
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Guilty! 5 of the 6 charges.


----------



## bluescreen (Dec 29, 2021)

She'll appeal, won't she, on some obscure grounds.


----------



## Dogsauce (Dec 29, 2021)

Let’s have a bit of blabbing now Ghislaine.


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 29, 2021)

[URL unfurl


----------



## two sheds (Dec 29, 2021)

so up to 70 years if they run consecutively?


----------



## TopCat (Dec 29, 2021)

bluescreen said:


> She'll appeal, won't she, on some obscure grounds.


The nonce will be sweating right now.


----------



## petee (Dec 29, 2021)

bluescreen said:


> But what is the verdict?



while the jury is deliberating, the various reporters, hangers-on, etc. go outside for a smoke or out into the hallway for a chinwag, whetev. the jury sends a note to the judge saying "we're ready to come in." the judge then has to pull the room together so there's a bit of an interval. that's what yahoo was reporting.

source: myself, as i've sat on a criminal jury.


----------



## quiet guy (Dec 29, 2021)

The Grand Old Duke of Nonce is going to be sweating his tits off waiting to see if Ghislaine decides to drop names to get a lighter sentence


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 29, 2021)

So what next for HRH seedy fucker?


----------



## TopCat (Dec 29, 2021)

not-bono-ever said:


> So what next for HRH seedy fucker?


No sleep tonight unaided.


----------



## equationgirl (Dec 29, 2021)

Never have I been happier about a verdict.


----------



## TopCat (Dec 29, 2021)

The news might finish mum off.


----------



## planetgeli (Dec 29, 2021)

not-bono-ever said:


> So what next for HRH seedy fucker?



Sweating


----------



## TopCat (Dec 29, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> Never have I been happier about a verdict.


Nonce Andrew is due in court on the 4th January 2022. A civil trial but it's not looking good now.


----------



## equationgirl (Dec 29, 2021)

TopCat said:


> Nonce Andrew is due in court on the 4th January 2022. A civil trial but it's not looking good now.


HAPPY 2022


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 29, 2021)

Part 2 said:


> Ghislaine Maxwell found guilty in sex-trafficking trial
> 
> 
> Maxwell, 60, convicted on five of the six charges she faced as US prosecutors hail verdict and say ‘justice has been done’
> ...


Turned out nice again


----------



## not a trot (Dec 29, 2021)

not-bono-ever said:


> So what next for HRH seedy fucker?


Ring the Samaritans.


----------



## weltweit (Dec 29, 2021)

So, barring an appeal that is her seen to. But it doesn't go anywhere toward the rich and famous people Epstein entertained, some of which may have also enjoyed the young trafficked girls. And there were a lot of prominent people Epstein entertained.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Dec 29, 2021)

not a trot said:


> Ring the Samaritans.


Pretty sure he cut a fee for middle-manning an arms deal with them


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 29, 2021)

not a trot said:


> Ring the Samaritans.


Already spoken to them,they've blocked Andrew's landline and mobile


----------



## tim (Dec 29, 2021)

unintentional post


----------



## tim (Dec 29, 2021)

This is an odd way of championing the rights of Assange the Shit Smearer. , who was also credibly accused of rape. I'm sure the D of Y wishes that he'd committed his alleged offences in Sweden as the Swedish Statute of Limitations would mean that too much time had elapsed for charges to be brought.











						Julian Assange: Sweden drops rape investigation
					

Prosecutors drop a rape inquiry into Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, who is in custody in the UK.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## Flavour (Dec 29, 2021)

from the guardian:

Maxwell was convicted on five of the six charges she faced. In addition to sex-trafficking, Maxwell was found guilty of conspiracy to entice individuals under the age of 17 to travel in interstate commerce with intent to engage in illegal sexual activity, conspiracy to transport individuals under the age of 17 to travel in interstate commerce with intent to engage in illegal sexual activity; transportation of an individual under the age of 17 with intent to engage in illegal sexual activity; and conspiracy to commit sex trafficking of individuals under the age of 18.

is it just me or is that kind of hard to understand?


----------



## MrSki (Dec 29, 2021)

Flavour said:


> from the guardian:
> 
> Maxwell was convicted on five of the six charges she faced. In addition to sex-trafficking, Maxwell was found guilty of conspiracy to entice individuals under the age of 17 to travel in interstate commerce with intent to engage in illegal sexual activity, conspiracy to transport individuals under the age of 17 to travel in interstate commerce with intent to engage in illegal sexual activity; transportation of an individual under the age of 17 with intent to engage in illegal sexual activity; and conspiracy to commit sex trafficking of individuals under the age of 18.
> 
> is it just me or is that kind of hard to understand?


Possibly different State laws? Don't quote me though.


----------



## Crispy (Dec 29, 2021)

in addition to sex trafficking,
planning to entice kids into sex with her mates
planning to move those kids around, for sex with her mates
actually doing that moving around
planning to do sex trafficking with kids

I suspect the evidence standards differ for the different charges, so they had to be thorough.
It the sort of nuanced sheet you need to charge when you're trying to pin something heinous on someone slippery.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Dec 29, 2021)

Flavour said:


> is it just me or is that kind of hard to understand?



could do with spacing out better

Maxwell was found guilty of 

conspiracy to entice individuals under the age of 17 to travel in interstate commerce with intent to engage in illegal sexual activity, 

conspiracy to transport individuals under the age of 17 to travel in interstate commerce with intent to engage in illegal sexual activity; 

transportation of an individual under the age of 17 with intent to engage in illegal sexual activity; 

and conspiracy to commit sex trafficking of individuals under the age of 18.

I am not American and not a lawyer, and I don't fully understand what is involved in some of those offences, but transporting someone across state boundary lines seems to be part of it (don't know if it would be ok if you only moved a person from one town to another in the same state.)

Mann Act - Wikipedia has more.


----------



## bluescreen (Dec 29, 2021)

Isn't the point about crossing state lines that it makes the crime a federal offense instead of just a state offense? 
US law is a mystery to me so I hope someone will be along soon to explain it.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 29, 2021)




----------



## tim (Dec 29, 2021)

Yes,the Mann act was used a lot in the past to criminalise black men with white partners. Charlie Chaplin was also charged. They went for him not because  of his notorious sleaziness, but because the authorities were worried about him spreading Communism


----------



## DaveCinzano (Dec 29, 2021)

bluescreen said:


> Isn't the point about crossing state lines that it makes the crime a federal offense instead of just a state offense?
> US law is a mystery to me so I hope someone will be along soon to explain it.


This was a Federal case, brought by a Federal prosecutor (US Attorney) before a Federal judge in a Federal District Court (Southern District of New York), under Federal law.


----------



## bluescreen (Dec 29, 2021)

DaveCinzano said:


> This was a Federal case, brought by a Federal prosecutor (US Attorney) before a Federal judge in a Federal District Court (Southern District of New York), under Federal law.


Yes, I realise that.. I was asking whether it's the crossing the state lines that makes it specifically a federal offense.


----------



## weltweit (Dec 29, 2021)

I wonder if her crimes exceed those of her dad, I think they probably do.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Dec 29, 2021)

Para 11 is a full-on, studs-out sliding tackle:



> Epstein, a convicted sex offender and presumed billionaire, counted Prince Andrew and former presidents Bill Clinton and Donald Trump as cronies before killing himself in a New York jail in 2019, about one month after his sex-trafficking arrest.











						Ghislaine Maxwell found guilty in sex-trafficking trial
					

Maxwell, 60, convicted on five of the six charges she faced as US prosecutors hail verdict and say ‘justice has been done’




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Wilf (Dec 29, 2021)

weltweit said:


> I wonder if her crimes exceed those of her dad, I think they probably do.


By the by, her brothers Ian and Kevin were also charged with offences relating to their father's business empire thieving.  I remember there being some 'surprise' when they got off.


----------



## petee (Dec 30, 2021)

Puddy_Tat said:


> Mann Act - Wikipedia has more.



beat me to it.


----------



## petee (Dec 30, 2021)

bluescreen said:


> Isn't the point about crossing state lines that it makes the crime a federal offense instead of just a state offense?



yes.


----------



## tim (Dec 30, 2021)

weltweit said:


> I wonder if her crimes exceed those of her dad, I think they probably do.


On balance, they probably don't. She was a procurer for Epstein.

 I can't imagine that Robert Maxwell didn't have people procuring women for him and his customers. She was the faithful servant and I can't see how a servant can be more of a criminal than a master. Anyway, let's not forget that Maxwell stole the pensions of thousands of Mirror employees; had very close dealings with some very gruesome East European heads of state and was facing potential war-crime charges.


Maxwell was under investigation for war crimes


----------



## brogdale (Dec 30, 2021)

Family of journalists


----------



## Wilf (Dec 30, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Family of journalists





> It’s hard not to feel a batsqueak of pity for Ghislaine Maxwell — 500 days and counting in solitary confinement. I intersected briefly with her at Oxford. As a fresher I wandered into Balliol JCR one day in search of its subsidised breakfast granola-and-Nescafé offering and found a shiny glamazon with naughty eyes *holding court astride a table, a high-heeled boot resting on my brother Boris’s thigh.* She gave me a pitying glance but I did manage to snag an invite to her party in Headington Hill Hall — even though I wasn't in the same college as her and Boris. I have a memory of her father, Bob, coming out in a towelling robe and telling us all to go home. I’m sure fairweather friends would not reveal they went to a Ghislaine Maxwell party: as Barbara Amiel’s brilliant memoir _Friends and Enemies_ proves, you only know who your real chums are when you’re in the gutter.


----------



## keybored (Dec 30, 2021)

planetgeli said:


> Sweating


----------



## MrSki (Dec 30, 2021)




----------



## Dr. Furface (Dec 30, 2021)




----------



## Dr. Furface (Dec 30, 2021)

.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Dec 30, 2021)

MrSki said:


>



With one of the "co-conspirators" included in the deal being... Alan Dershowitz.


----------



## spanglechick (Dec 30, 2021)

tim said:


> On balance, they probably don't. She was a procurer for Epstein.
> 
> I can't imagine that Robert Maxwell didn't have people procuring women for him and his customers. She was the faithful servant and I can't see how a servant can be more of a criminal than a master. Anyway, let's not forget that Maxwell stole the pensions of thousands of Mirror employees; had very close dealings with some very gruesome East European heads of state and was facing potential war-crime charges.
> 
> ...


While I’m not sure the competitive evil calculation is useful or even possible, I do feel the need to point out that you seem to have drawn an equivalence between Ghislane Maxwell’s crimes, and a hypothetical employee procuring women for her father.  

Ghislane Maxwell wasn’t just a procurer.  She groomed children into sexual exploitation and trafficking.  Not women.  Children of 14.


----------



## Cado (Dec 30, 2021)

I'm struggling with the prosecutions argument that this "was the worst crimes imaginable" anybody concur.

I'd have thought on the other side of the pond that 9/11 or the Holocaust would beat this to the title of "worst crime imaginable" - or have they got a very sheltered prosecution.

Nobody died here.


----------



## Calamity1971 (Dec 30, 2021)

Cado said:


> Nobody died here


We don't know that. Even if that were the case, how many that suffered abuse have lived a half life after a trauma like that? Oh, it's only a bit of sexual abuse, give ya head a shake. Is that what you're impying? 
Correct me if I've taken that bollocks out of context.


----------



## petee (Dec 30, 2021)

Cado said:


> I'd have thought on the other side of the pond that 9/11 or the Holocaust would beat this to the title of "worst crime imaginable"



not clear on this, 9/11 happened on one side of the pond and the holocaust on the other.
not that it matters on this globe of rightwingism and capital.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Dec 30, 2021)

.


----------



## tim (Dec 30, 2021)

spanglechick said:


> While I’m not sure the competitive evil calculation is useful or even possible, I do feel the need to point out that you seem to have drawn an equivalence between Ghislane Maxwell’s crimes, and a hypothetical employee procuring women for her father.
> 
> Ghislane Maxwell wasn’t just a procurer.  She groomed children into sexual exploitation and trafficking.  Not women.  Children of 14.


I was pointing out that her father was an evil, powerful, murderous old shit and that Epstein was an evil, powerful child abusing shit. She is an evil abusing factotum. I too am wary of  "competitive evil calculation". However,  I think it is absurd to say that "her crimes exceeded her dad", if only because she never had the power to commit the crimes of her dad.


----------



## equationgirl (Dec 30, 2021)

Cado said:


> I'm struggling with the prosecutions argument that this "was the worst crimes imaginable" anybody concur.
> 
> I'd have thought on the other side of the pond that 9/11 or the Holocaust would beat this to the title of "worst crime imaginable" - or have they got a very sheltered prosecution.
> 
> Nobody died here.


Whilst perhaps not on a holocaust level of war crime, she trafficked children, repeatedly. We don't know how many victims there are, nor the effects of trauma on them. For example, Virginia Guiffre has spoken about wanting to die, on the Epstein island she was trafficked to.

Because she is a woman who committed these crimes against children, and against the general societal philosophy of 'women don't do this type of thing', that's why it's in the 'worst crime imaginable' territory.


----------



## tim (Dec 30, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> Because she is a woman who committed these crimes against children, and against the general societal philosophy of 'women don't do this type of thing', that's why it's in the 'worst crime imaginable' territory.



Yes, small children in the UK are murdered by their male "carers" to frequently for it normally to get much press coverage. If, however, as we've seen twice in the past few weeks those responsible are women it makes the news with great emphasis on their intrinsic depravity.

For example, these wicked crimes









						Blackburn man guilty of killing two children and woman six years apart
					

Jordan Monaghan smothered daughter and son in 2013 and gave new partner a fatal overdose in 2019




					www.google.com


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 30, 2021)

Just spotted that as well as Dershowitz, the BBC presented comments on the trial from Kyle Rittenhouse's defence lawyer.

#impartial


----------



## equationgirl (Dec 30, 2021)

SpookyFrank said:


> Just spotted that as well as Dershowitz, the BBC presented comments on the trial from Kyle Rittenhouse's defence lawyer.
> 
> #impartial


I think you meant #totesimpartial100%


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 30, 2021)

Seem to remember she’s spent ~$3m on her defence. Bit of a waste of dough, but guess she won’t need much now, there’s a limit as to how much commissary you’re allowed. 

_WindsorDaviesMeme_


----------



## Hollis (Dec 30, 2021)

Puddy_Tat said:


> but transporting someone across state boundary lines seems to be part of it (don't know if it would be ok if you only moved a person from one town to another in the same state.)



The US state boundary lines  - the makings of many a good episode in The Dukes of Hazard.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Dec 30, 2021)

bluescreen said:


> Yes, I realise that.. I was asking whether it's the crossing the state lines that makes it specifically a federal offense.





petee said:


> yes.



ah

think that's what's confusing me (and probably a few other people in the UK) - while there are some differences in law round the four countries of the UK, the whole concept of state and federal law / offences is a bit   from a UK perspective...


----------



## A380 (Dec 30, 2021)

Puddy_Tat said:


> ah
> 
> think that's what's confusing me (and probably a few other people in the UK) - while there are some differences in law round the four countries of the UK, the whole concept of state and federal law / offences is a bit   from a UK perspective...


Scotland is completely different. It is probably as  different from  English ( which also means Welsh)  law than we both are from American law. 

It has loads of the old cool offences like housebreaking and the ‘not proven’ verdict. Breach of the peace is a crime there too.


----------



## TopCat (Dec 30, 2021)

A380 said:


> Scotland is completely different. It is probably as  different from  English ( which also means Welsh)  law than we both are from American law.
> 
> It has loads of the old cool offences like housebreaking and the ‘not proven’ verdict. Breach of the peace is a crime there too.


So is Mopery.


----------



## A380 (Dec 30, 2021)

TopCat said:


> So is Mopery.


Just looked that up. Ace crime, I’d like that on my record.


----------



## Dogsauce (Dec 30, 2021)

A380 said:


> Just looked that up. Ace crime, I’d like that on my record.


I liked this bit from the wiki entry:



> In discussions of law, _mopery_ is used as a placeholder name to mean some crime whose nature is not important to the problem at hand. This is sometimes expanded to "mopery with intent to creep" or "mopery with intent to gawk".



I want ‘mopery with intent to gawk’ on my charge sheet.


----------



## rubbershoes (Dec 30, 2021)

A380 said:


> Scotland is completely different. It is probably as  different from  English ( which also means Welsh)  law than we both are from American law.
> 
> It has loads of the old cool offences like housebreaking and the ‘not proven’ verdict. Breach of the peace is a crime there too.



Scottish and English law is different. But committing a crime that straddles the border between the two countries doesn't elevate the crime in any way, unlike in the US


----------



## 2hats (Dec 30, 2021)

Hollis said:


> The US state boundary lines  - the makings of many a good episode in The Dukes of Hazard.


That was the county line (probation condition).


----------



## A380 (Dec 30, 2021)

rubbershoes said:


> Scottish and English law is different. But committing a crime that straddles the border between the two countries doesn't elevate the crime in any way, unlike in the US


It doesn’t as the UK isn’t federal. Also in law UK borders ( parish and county which are both important for charging ) are 1km wide,  in that any courts jurisdiction extends up to 500 meters into the next. This avoids the  Dukes of Hazard county line stuff.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Dec 30, 2021)

A380 said:


> Scotland is completely different. It is probably as  different from  English ( which also means Welsh)  law than we both are from American law.
> 
> It has loads of the old cool offences like housebreaking and the ‘not proven’ verdict. Breach of the peace is a crime there too.



yes - i know some of the offences are different, and that some things can be illegal in Scotland but not in England (or vice versa) but you either get done in an English or Scottish court depending on where you (allegedly) did whatever.

I used to be involved in doing criminal records checks for taxi drivers, and one came back as having been done for "lewd and libidinous practices and behaviour" in Scotland, and had to make some enquiries just what this meant (think it equated to indecent exposure in English law) before we said 'no'


----------



## A380 (Dec 30, 2021)

2hats said:


> That was the county line (probation condition).


If you commit a non federal offence ( including murder) in one US state and then go to another there almost always has to be an extradition process to bring you back for trial as if you had gone to another country.


----------



## Sue (Dec 30, 2021)

rubbershoes said:


> Scottish and English law is different. But committing a crime that straddles the border between the two countries doesn't elevate the crime in any way, unlike in the US


I've committed mopery on both sides of the border but do I get any recognition for it in England? No, no I bloody don't. 😡


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Dec 30, 2021)

NO MOPERY


----------



## A380 (Dec 30, 2021)

Puddy_Tat said:


> yes - i know some of the offences are different, and that some things can be illegal in Scotland but not in England (or vice versa) but you either get done in an English or Scottish court depending on where you (allegedly) did whatever.
> 
> I used to be involved in doing criminal records checks for taxi drivers, and one came back as having been done for "lewd and libidinous practices and behaviour" in Scotland, and had to make some enquiries just what this meant (think it equated to indecent exposure in English law) before we said 'no'



They also have completely different rules of evidence, for example you need two witnesses for most things, so their old bill always have to act in pairs. Also they don’t have PACE so police powers, searches, detention and all the other stuff is / are completely different.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Dec 30, 2021)

Dogsauce said:


> I liked this bit from the wiki entry:
> 
> 
> 
> I want ‘mopery with intent to gawk’ on my charge sheet.


My grandfather once received a police warning for the offence of _cycling furiously_.


----------



## Cerv (Dec 30, 2021)

A380 said:


> If you commit a non federal offence ( including murder) in one US state and then go to another there almost always has to be an extradition process to bring you back for trial as if you had gone to another country.


comes up a lot in episodes of Law & Order.
the suspect has popped 5 mins down the road, from New York to New Jersey and now might as well be on the other side of the planet. (may be exaggerated for dramatic effect)


----------



## A380 (Dec 30, 2021)

S☼I said:


> My grandfather once received a police warning for the offence of _cycling furiously_.


Could have been worse. Could have been wanton and furiously…


----------



## DTM_DHFC (Dec 30, 2021)

I think we’re heading for a royal suicide very soon as Randy Andy literally threw  himself under the bus with alibi the now convicted child groomer.


----------



## teqniq (Dec 30, 2021)

I surmise they've had some complaints:


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 30, 2021)

tim said:


> This is an odd way of championing the rights of Assange the Shit Smearer. , who was also credibly accused of rape. I'm sure the D of Y wishes that he'd committed his alleged offences in Sweden as the Swedish Statute of Limitations would mean that too much time had elapsed for charges to be brought.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



If assange is being effectively tortured by the government it's the only effective thing they're doing


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 30, 2021)

teqniq said:


> I surmise they've had some complaints:



Glad to see they've dropped his academic title


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 30, 2021)

teqniq said:


> I surmise they've had some complaints:





Gary Glitter would have been a more appropriate person, ffs.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 30, 2021)

Cado said:


> I'm struggling with the prosecutions argument that this "was the worst crimes imaginable" anybody concur.
> 
> I'd have thought on the other side of the pond that 9/11 or the Holocaust would beat this to the title of "worst crime imaginable" - or have they got a very sheltered prosecution.
> 
> Nobody died here.


Yeh I've noticed you struggling with quite a bit. For those of us not involved with jihadi terrorism or in positions of power in Nazi Germany, which is most of us, things like murder, rape, and child abuse are among the worst crimes people can commit.


----------



## Hollis (Dec 30, 2021)

2hats said:


> That was the county line (probation condition).



Yeah - I realised that afterwards!  But didn't want to derail further.. There is some heated legal debate on internetz over the jurisdiction of Sheriff Rosco P. Coltrane. lols. 

Does fleeing across the county line actually work for the Dukes of Hazzard?


----------



## scalyboy (Dec 30, 2021)

Could someone explain to me how US plea bargaining works? I thought it was arranged prior to trial, i.e. the accused pleads guilty and in return gets a pre-arranged reduced sentence, saving the taxpayer the expense of a jury trial, but if they opt for a jury trial they run the risk of a longer sentence (or the death penalty where applicable).

But can it also apply to the pre-sentencing phase, i.e. if La Maxwell offers to name names in exchange for a reduced sentence? Or is the latter not the same as plea bargaining? 

The latter, pre-sentencing arrangement to me sounds more like the kind of deals done by organised crime figures who rat on their associates, or that silly rapper with the facial tatts who grassed up his fellow gang members.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 30, 2021)

Complain about the Dershowitz interview: Complaints | Contact the BBC

This will hopefully backfire on Andrew.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 30, 2021)




----------



## TopCat (Dec 30, 2021)

Ghislaine Maxwell: What the trial means for Prince Andrew
					

Ghislaine Maxwell has been convicted of grooming teenagers. What does this mean for her former friend?



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 30, 2021)

My wording if anyone needs a crib sheet:

Presenting Alan Dershowitz as if he were neutral 

Alan Dershowitz was interviewed as a legal expert on the Maxwell verdict.

I want to complain about: 1) the choice to interview him; 2) that you didn't contextualise by mentioning that Dershowitz acted for Epstein, including the so-called "sweetheart deal", or that Virginia Giuffre accused him of abuse, or the defamation suits; 3) that you gave him a platform to undermine Giuffre, unchallenged, which he used to say that it shows how accusations against him and Prince Andrew are wrong.

How did this happen? Was it your intention to try to defend Prince Andrew and defame Guiffre?

I require specific answers to all of those points, not just a blanket admission that you had "fallen below standards". After your handling of the Savile case you should have learned lessons.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 30, 2021)

equationgirl said:


> Because she is a woman who committed these crimes against children, and against the general societal philosophy of 'women don't do this type of thing', that's why it's in the 'worst crime imaginable' territory.



This doesn’t sit well on first reading as it seems women get treated more harshly just for being a woman. Yet with Maxwell, Hindley, West and so on the victims mostly would not have gone to their fates if it weren’t for the woman giving a sense of security around the situation.


----------



## Athos (Dec 30, 2021)

scalyboy said:


> Could someone explain to me how US plea bargaining works? I thought it was arranged prior to trial, i.e. the accused pleads guilty and in return gets a pre-arranged reduced sentence, saving the taxpayer the expense of a jury trial, but if they opt for a jury trial they run the risk of a longer sentence (or the death penalty where applicable).
> 
> But can it also apply to the pre-sentencing phase, i.e. if La Maxwell offers to name names in exchange for a reduced sentence? Or is the latter not the same as plea bargaining?
> 
> The latter, pre-sentencing arrangement to me sounds more like the kind of deals done by organised crime figures who rat on their associates, or that silly rapper with the facial tatts who grassed up his fellow gang members.


Under the Federal Rule of Criminal Proedure 35(b), a sentenced person can have that sentence reduced if they provide substantial assistance to the state in investigating/prosecuting another person; it usually has to happen within one year of the original sentencing.  So, basically, if any appeal fails, she may well turn snitch to get a reduction if the authorities play ball, which'll depend on what evidence she can give against whom.  Must be a few rich and powerful people shitting bricks, now.


----------



## TopCat (Dec 30, 2021)

It;s going to look a bit iffy if she dies soon.


----------



## MysteryGuest (Dec 30, 2021)

TopCat said:


> It;s going to look a bit iffy if she dies soon.


Brenda or Ghislaine?


----------



## spitfire (Dec 30, 2021)

scalyboy said:


> Could someone explain to me how US plea bargaining works? I thought it was arranged prior to trial, i.e. the accused pleads guilty and in return gets a pre-arranged reduced sentence, saving the taxpayer the expense of a jury trial, but if they opt for a jury trial they run the risk of a longer sentence (or the death penalty where applicable).
> 
> But can it also apply to the pre-sentencing phase, i.e. if La Maxwell offers to name names in exchange for a reduced sentence? Or is the latter not the same as plea bargaining?
> 
> The latter, pre-sentencing arrangement to me sounds more like the kind of deals done by organised crime figures who rat on their associates, or that silly rapper with the facial tatts who grassed up his fellow gang members.



Here's a thread from someone who seems to know what they are on about.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 30, 2021)

Athos said:


> Under the Federal Rule of Criminal Proedure 35(b), a sentenced person can have that sentence reduced if they provide substantial assistance to the state in investigating/prosecuting another person; it usually has to happen within one year of the original sentencing.  So, basically, if any appeal fails, she may well turn snitch to get a reduction.  Must be a few rich and powerful people shitting bricks, now.




Substantial assistance would mean giving enough to warrant a charge against others, can she actually do that? Dershowitz seems covered, what does she have on the likes of Clinton that could stick?


----------



## Athos (Dec 30, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Substantial assistance would mean giving enough to warrant a charge against others, can she actually do that? Dershowitz seems covered, what does she have on the likes of Clinton that could stick?


Who knows?  She might have nothing more than her self-serving testimony that can't be corroborated.  Or, if she had any sense, she might have some covert video footage that she's kept back for just this eventuality!


----------



## scalyboy (Dec 30, 2021)

spitfire said:


> Here's a thread from someone who seems to know what they are on about.



Thanks👍


----------



## brogdale (Dec 30, 2021)

spitfire said:


> Here's a thread from someone who seems to know what they are on about.



The crux of the matter from the perspective of Windsor:


----------



## andysays (Dec 30, 2021)

TopCat said:


> Ghislaine Maxwell: What the trial means for Prince Andrew
> 
> 
> Ghislaine Maxwell has been convicted of grooming teenagers. What does this mean for her former friend?
> ...


Was just coming here to post this



> ...the trial heard no evidence that Prince Andrew was ever allegedly involved in wrongdoing. But one of his former closest friends is now a convicted abuser.





> During his 2019 BBC interview, Prince Andrew told Newsnight that his relationship with Epstein was a product of his long-standing friendship with Ghislaine Maxwell.
> 
> Specifically, he said he and Epstein first met in 1999 - and his closeness to Maxwell was the only reason he got to know the paedophile financier in the first place. Yet throughout this trial, Maxwell's accusers did not present her as some kind of unwitting helper for Epstein, but a woman who was central to his plans to commit abuse.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 30, 2021)

I was supposed to be seeing the Nutcracker at the Collesium today, just been cancelled as staff down with Covid, was a bit disappointed but contend myself that I’m not facing 60 years in stir 😀


----------



## Athos (Dec 30, 2021)

brogdale said:


> The crux of the matter from the perspective of Windsor:
> 
> View attachment 303733


There's probably more public interest in seeing child abusers being convicted than in insisting that she serve her full sentence; it's unlikley she'll ever be in a position to reoffend, given the unusual circumstances of this case.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 30, 2021)

brogdale said:


> The crux of the matter from the perspective of Windsor:
> 
> View attachment 303733



I doubt US prosecutors will fancy their chances of rolling this up to criminal charges against Prince Andrew. Nor will they want to deal with the fallout of giving Maxwell a sentence that could allow her to ever see daylight again.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 30, 2021)

SpookyFrank said:


> I doubt US prosecutors will fancy their chances of rolling this up to criminal charges against Prince Andrew. Nor will they want to deal with the fallout of giving Maxwell a sentence that could allow her to ever see daylight again.


I really don't have enough background to know what the authorities might do; fingers crossed that it causes him angst though.


----------



## MickiQ (Dec 30, 2021)

brogdale said:


> I really don't have enough background to know what the authorities might do; fingers crossed that it causes him angst though.


I'm sure it's causing him angst at this very moment but alas we aren't getting to see it.


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 30, 2021)

SpookyFrank said:


> Nor will they want to deal with the fallout of giving Maxwell a sentence that could allow her to ever see daylight again.



Might happen if she could deliver damning evidence against Bill Clinton and Donald Trump, though I'm not sure prosecutors will be ambitious enough to try to lock up a third of the country's living presidents.


----------



## 1927 (Dec 30, 2021)

Yossarian said:


> Might happen if she could deliver damning evidence against Bill Clinton and Donald Trump, though I'm not sure prosecutors will be ambitious enough to try to lock up a third of the country's living presidents.


Putting aside the implications for justice another consideration, sadly, might be the likely celebrity status of any prosecutor prepared to take in the case. I couldn’t name an NY DA, but I bet I could if they decided to prosecute Trump, Clinton and their other associates.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Dec 30, 2021)

danny la rouge said:


> Complain about the Dershowitz interview: Complaints | Contact the BBC
> 
> This will hopefully backfire on Andrew.


I would do if the complaint form wasn't such a headache


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Dec 30, 2021)

This comment pretty much nails it for Andrew's current predicament regarding this photo.


'Now we have Ghislaine Maxwell, sex trafficker, standing there next to a woman who says she was trafficked, next to Prince Andrew who says he wasn't there.'


----------



## Aladdin (Dec 30, 2021)

I suspect Andy will be killed in a trafficking accident.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Dec 30, 2021)

danny la rouge said:


> Complain about the Dershowitz interview: Complaints | Contact the BBC
> 
> This will hopefully backfire on Andrew.


Done. Was easier than it first appeared.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 30, 2021)

AmateurAgitator said:


> Done. Was easier than it first appeared.


Good man.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 30, 2021)

TopCat said:


> It;s going to look a bit iffy if she dies soon.


No noose being in this case good noose


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 30, 2021)

Here are the details of your complaint:


----------

YOUR COMPLAINT: 

Alan Dershowitz on BBC news 

Not a suitable person? Gary Glitter would have been more suitable! How on earth did that happen? Very much gives the appearance that the UK state broadcaster was trying to assist in destroying the credibility of a victim of child sexual abuse who is accusing a senior British Royal of committing that abuse.


----------



## RainbowTown (Dec 30, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Very much gives the appearance that the UK state broadcaster was trying to assist in destroying the credibility of a victim of child sexual abuse who is accusing a senior British Royal of committing that abuse.



Yes, the very same UK state broadcaster who employed one Jimmy Saville for decades, knowing full well the 'speculation' surrounding him. Which proved to be totally true. And which they all but turned a blind eye too.

 Sadly nothing surprises me about that 'national treasure' organization anymore and the way they operate.


----------



## bluescreen (Dec 30, 2021)

RainbowTown said:


> Yes, the very same UK state broadcaster who employed one Jimmy Saville for decades, knowing full well the 'speculation' surrounding him. Which proved to be totally true. And which they all but turned a blind eye too.
> 
> Sadly nothing surprises me about that 'national treasure' organization anymore and the way they operate.


Was that the same Jimmy Savile who was a close friend of Andrew's brother - so close, in fact, that he acted as their unofficial marriage counsellor? 
Indeed it was. (And is that the same brother who has an unfortunate tendency to befriend and defend wrong uns, such as the former bishop of Lewes and of Gloucester? Indeed it is. They are an unlucky pair of brothers, unwise in their friends.)

And is that the same BBC that's worried about where its next meal is coming from?


----------



## Wilf (Dec 30, 2021)

Yossarian said:


> Might happen if she could deliver damning evidence against Bill Clinton and Donald Trump, though I'm not sure prosecutors will be ambitious enough tSimo try to lock up a third of the country's living presidents.


I was wondering similarly.  The usual working assumption is that the authorities _don't _want to pursue the rich and powerful. I can imagine there might be a few who feel Dershovitz has got it coming, but even that would get rather messy, given the shit he will have on X, Y and Z.  Similarly, why would they want to go after Poedipus Rex?  He'd certainly be a feather in the cap of the prosecutor, but more problematic in a geopolitical context.


----------



## Weller (Dec 30, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Seem to remember she’s spent ~$3m on her defence. Bit of a waste of dough, but guess she won’t need much now, there’s a limit as to how much commissary you’re allowed.
> 
> _WindsorDaviesMeme_


Perhaps  she didn't waste her time whilst avoiding detection in hiding pulling in  in a few cash favors from the rich and famous  she "helped"  in the past when she took the tin foil off her mobile phone 
 I had expected to hear more about those people  during the trial as it was reported they tracked her down via her data usage
Im a bit pissed that before Epsteins death they said they  had so much data from a diary and photos videos etc from his homes  etc  yet we've heard little  about that evidence who were in their visitors or contacts , customers  list etc and now may never
Hopefully she will spill some beans or someone else will once appeals over etc I dont know much about the law but can she do that now in appeal etc

Ghislaine Maxwell 'kept a mobile phone wrapped in foil to evade detection by law enforcement'


----------



## Raheem (Dec 30, 2021)

Seen elsewhere: _You know it's love when you find yourself finishing their sentences for them._


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 30, 2021)

Another example of Sweatless Pizza Paedo being exempt from the normal rules


----------



## petee (Dec 30, 2021)

Puddy_Tat said:


> ah
> 
> think that's what's confusing me (and probably a few other people in the UK) - while there are some differences in law round the four countries of the UK, the whole concept of state and federal law / offences is a bit   from a UK perspective...



oversimplified version: the US was originally 13 different countries








						Articles of Confederation - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				



this proved too weak, specifically to get the war debt paid down, so the Federalists, the party of the nabobs, twisted some arms and pushed through the Constitution








						Constitutional Convention (United States) - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				



but "federalism" is still guiding principal








						Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				



a residue of this is that interstate movement of almost any kind is a federal issue. if maxwell had groomed women who were residents of NYS, to be transported within NYS, to be exploited within NYS, it would be in the first instance a State Police matter. State Police tend to be a combination of highway patrol and a bureau of detectives




__





						State bureau of investigation - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 30, 2021)




----------



## Badgers (Dec 30, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Here are the details of your complaint:
> 
> 
> ----------
> ...


----------



## TopCat (Dec 30, 2021)

MysteryGuest said:


> Brenda or Ghislaine?


Hardly Brenda. She is over a hundred and has had many parts replaced that are no longer available.


----------



## Badgers (Dec 30, 2021)




----------



## TopCat (Dec 30, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Here are the details of your complaint:
> 
> 
> ----------
> ...


They will stop at nothing to defend the royals.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 30, 2021)

I do wonder why Rachel Johnson chose to make a link between maxwell and her brother?  'Mischievous' at the very least.


----------



## TopCat (Dec 30, 2021)

Badgers said:


>



Another cunt extraordinaire. What a surprise.


----------



## TopCat (Dec 30, 2021)

Wilf said:


> I do wonder why Rachel Johnson chose to make a link between maxwell and her brother?  'Mischievous' at the very least.


She highlighted the link. It was already there.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 30, 2021)

It’s just the arrogance of these fuckers. That Maxwell has a French passport, she was missing for months, could easily have slipped away to France and settled in next door to Polanski, drinking Bandol for the rest of her days, but she was arrogant enough to hide in the US, thinking her privilege would somehow protect her. Wonder if a cheeky Bandol will accompany her meal in the Metropolitan Detention Center tonight?


----------



## Wilf (Dec 30, 2021)

TopCat said:


> Another cunt extraordinaire. What a surprise.


One of the finer lines from Arid Extra Dry's interview was something along the lines of 'no, I don't regret my friendship with epstein, he introduced me to some extraordinary people'. Yeah?


----------



## Weller (Dec 30, 2021)

danny la rouge said:


>



The struggle is real.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 30, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> It’s just the arrogance of these fuckers. That Maxwell has a French passport, she was missing for months, could easily have slipped away to France and settled in next door to Polanski, drinking Bandol for the rest of her days, but she was arrogant enough to hide in the US, thinking her privilege would somehow protect her. Wonder if a cheeky Bandol will accompany her meal in the Metropolitan Detention Center tonight?


Wondered about that myself last night.  Without looking it up, I think she spent a couple of years hiding in the States pre arrest, obviously having access to massive amounts of money.  Could easily have fashioned some kind of escape particularly as, I assume, she already had people helping her avoid detection (actively or passively).


----------



## MickiQ (Dec 30, 2021)

I would imagine HWCS lawyer's must be sweating (especially since he can't) a bit about what sort of deal might get struck to give her a lighter sentence. His trial starts next week and if a deal is struck where she has dirt on him it might very well come out in the middle of his trial.


----------



## MysteryGuest (Dec 30, 2021)

TopCat said:


> Hardly Brenda. She is over a hundred and has had many parts replaced that are no longer available.



They'll turn her into an ER2000 made out of liquid crown jewels that can slide into prison cells...


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 30, 2021)

Weller said:


> The struggle is real.
> 
> View attachment 303789


It’s terrible when paedophiles maliciously photobomb you, isn’t it?


----------



## Wilf (Dec 30, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> I would imagine HWCS lawyer's must be sweating (especially since he can't) a bit about what sort of deal might get struck to give her a lighter sentence. His trial starts next week and if a deal is struck where she has dirt on him it might very well come out in the middle of his trial.


I've no idea how these things work, but haven't they already listed who will provide evidence in the case?


----------



## seeformiles (Dec 30, 2021)

I can imagine a lot of supposedly powerful men experiencing unexpected indigestion over the Xmas period.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 30, 2021)

What is it about rapists and nonces that makes them such interesting guests piers?


----------



## Wilf (Dec 30, 2021)

Weller said:


> The struggle is real.
> 
> View attachment 303789


To which I raise you:


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 30, 2021)

Wilf said:


> Wondered about that myself last night.  Without looking it up, I think she spent a couple of years hiding in the States pre arrest, obviously having access to massive amounts of money.  Could easily have fashioned some kind of escape particularly as, I assume, she already had people helping her avoid detection (actively or passively).




Was in New Hampshire, she could have walked in to Canada and with her French passport wafted to freedom.


----------



## petee (Dec 30, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Was in New Hampshire, she could have walked in to Canada and with her French passport wafted to freedom.



Town and Country has the angle









						See Inside the New Hampshire House Where Ghislaine Maxwell Was Arrested
					

The accused Jeffrey Epstein accomplice was hiding out in a luxurious compound on 156 acres.




					www.townandcountrymag.com
				




but do french passports have special value in quebec?
(and tbh walking from bradford to canada would be quite a trek. i see what you mean of course.)


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 30, 2021)

Would imagine fluent French and French passport in Quebec would help one blend in, allowing for an easy PJ out of there to France. Or leg it to St Pierre and Miquelon, bit rough there but better than Federal Penitentiary…


----------



## Wilf (Dec 30, 2021)

From what I remember she slowly slipped from view and whilst she was sending the odd message didn't have a public address.  In practice it was probably a case of the frog in the slowly heating pan of water. Thought she wouldn't get prosecuted... thought she's have a good defence if she was... didn't fancy the life on the run... thought she could do a runner at some later date... then got the knock on the door.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Dec 30, 2021)

Doing a runner seems a particularly bad move if you're pleading innocence and expect to get away with it.


----------



## petee (Dec 30, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Or leg it to St Pierre and Miquelon, bit rough there but better than Federal Penitentiary…



right, that would be the ticket.


----------



## Weller (Dec 30, 2021)

Wilf said:


> To which I raise you


Then I will raise you
It may be a long game with many cards


----------



## Calamity1971 (Dec 30, 2021)

BBC news running with ' accuser speaks out',
ITV news ' victim speaks out'.
How are they still accusers after the cunt has been found guilty


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Dec 30, 2021)

As an abuse survivor and a republican I hope he suffers and the whole shit show collapses.

Louis MacNeice


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Dec 30, 2021)

Calamity1971 said:


> BBC news running with ' accuser speaks out',


This appears to have changed to 'survivor'.


----------



## Calamity1971 (Dec 30, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> This appears to have changed to 'survivor'.


That was 6pm when I watched it. Bit fucking late even for that shower.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Dec 30, 2021)

Calamity1971 said:


> That was 6pm when I watched it. Bit fucking late even for that shower.


Oh, I was referring to the website not the telly.


----------



## Calamity1971 (Dec 30, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Oh, I was referring to the website not the telly.


Looks like I'm watching the headlines again at 7pm!


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 30, 2021)




----------



## Calamity1971 (Dec 30, 2021)

Calamity1971 said:


> Looks like I'm watching the headlines again at 7pm!


Finally it's survivors. How fucking hard was that.


----------



## MickiQ (Dec 30, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> View attachment 303804


I know he's dumb but I don't think even he is that dumb


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 30, 2021)

Calamity1971 said:


> Finally it's survivors. How fucking hard was that.


The BBC probably spreading their bets in case she manages to overturn the verdict if or when she appeals.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 30, 2021)

BBC looking into how the Dershowitz interview happened. Real head scratcher that one.


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 30, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> View attachment 303804


No sweat!


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 30, 2021)

Sprocket. said:


> The BBC probably spreading their bets in case she manages to overturn the verdict if or when she appeals.




She can now be referred to as a child sex trafficker without fear of reproach regardless of what any appeal may decide, which btw all legal bods are saying right now that there is no way, the pros ran a tight case specifically to avoid that scenario, she’s history. Just a face saving thing for her scumbag lawyers and even bigger scumbag siblings.


----------



## UrbaneFox (Dec 30, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> It’s just the arrogance of these fuckers. That Maxwell has a French passport, she was missing for months, could easily have slipped away to France and settled in next door to Polanski, drinking Bandol for the rest of her days, but she was arrogant enough to hide in the US, thinking her privilege would somehow protect her.


Her house had a cheeky name, I seem to remember.


----------



## DTM_DHFC (Dec 30, 2021)

This is so so great listening in the light of the result


----------



## TopCat (Dec 30, 2021)

Speculation grows that Maxwell may try to cut a deal for reduced sentence
					

Experts say any deal depends on whether US government believes there is value in investigating network that may have been involved




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Kevbad the Bad (Dec 30, 2021)

My predictions for 2022. 
1. Andrew refuses to go to the US for the trial, and is supported by the Queen. 
2. Huge public controversy and outrage. 
3. The Queen then dies and the monarchy is tarnished by the case. 
4. Andrew is booed and attacked at her funeral. 
5. After that the monarchy is doomed.

What do you reckon? (I think predictions 1 to 4 are just possible.)


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 30, 2021)

Kevbad the Bad said:


> My predictions for 2022.
> 1. Andrew refuses to go to the US for the trial, and is supported by the Queen.
> 2. Huge public controversy and outrage.
> 3. The Queen then dies and the monarchy is tarnished by the case.
> ...


Plausible.


----------



## mx wcfc (Dec 30, 2021)

Kevbad the Bad said:


> My predictions for 2022.
> 1. Andrew refuses to go to the US for the trial, and is supported by the Queen.
> 2. Huge public controversy and outrage.
> 3. The Queen then dies and the monarchy is tarnished by the case.
> ...


Andrew refuses to go.  The Queen stays well out of the controversy
Bugger all from The Great British Public.  Govt does notrhing so as to not upset the Queen.
Queen dies.  It's all about her reign, and how loved she was.
Some people boo Andrew at the funeral, but he's basically ignored.  He then just disappears to Balmoral/Sandringham
Charles takes the throne to shouts of God Save the King, and everyone starts waiting for him to die so Wills can takeover the job
Faith in the monarchy restored.

Sorry.


----------



## Sue (Dec 30, 2021)

mx wcfc said:


> Andrew refuses to go.  The Queen stays well out of the controversy
> Bugger all from The Great British Public.  Govt does notrhing so as to not upset the Queen.
> Queen dies.  It's all about her reign, and how loved she was.
> Some people boo Andrew at the funeral, but he's basically ignored.  He then just disappears to Balmoral/Sandringham
> ...


I prefer Kevbad the Bad's version but suspect this one is more likely.


----------



## mx wcfc (Dec 30, 2021)

Sue said:


> I prefer Kevbad the Bad's version but suspect this one is more likely.


Yeah, me too.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 30, 2021)

Kevbad the Bad said:


> My predictions for 2022.
> 1. Andrew refuses to go to the US for the trial, and is supported by the Queen.
> 2. Huge public controversy and outrage.
> 3. The Queen then dies and the monarchy is tarnished by the case.
> ...


1. Almost certainly, particularly him not going.
2. Moderate controversy, his ratings get worse, open season for comedians (again). Everybody hates him already.
3, Dies - good chance. Doubt it will hit the monarchy's standing though, that will be Charlie's job.   
4. I like it!
5. Sadly, no, I don't see an existential crisis for the monarchy in this.  Only thing would be back to 1., if there was evidence the queen or Charles had tried to stop a criminal investigation in this country.


----------



## two sheds (Dec 30, 2021)

Nothing to see here people, nothing interesting to be learned.



> LONDON — Prince Andrew, the Duke of York, has made an “unprecedented” request for all witness testimony taken in his sexual abuse case to be kept secret, it has emerged.
> 
> The Duke wants depositions, including his own, to remain under seal, even if neither party declares the evidence confidential.
> 
> ...


----------



## Riklet (Dec 30, 2021)

Dont wanna sound all QAnon but... How long will she be sticking around for though if Andy's name gets bandied about?


----------



## mx wcfc (Dec 30, 2021)

Wilf said:


> 1. Almost certainly, particularly him not going.
> 2. Moderate controversy, his ratings get worse, open season for comedians (again). Everybody hates him already.
> 3, Dies - good chance. Doubt it will hit the monarchy's standing though, that will be Charlie's job.
> 4. I like it!
> 5. Sadly, no, I don't see an existential crisis for the monarchy in this.  Only thing would be back to 1., if there was evidence the queen or Charles had tried to stop a criminal investigation in this country.


I'm clutching at straws to find a way to figure out how this could go really badly for the monarchy.  

Does this work?

Charles dies
Anne dies
Wills and his kids all die
Harry and his kids die
The queen dies

Does that make Andrew King?  
That might cause the Monarchy a problem.  

(sorry, don't want a detailed analysis of the rules)


----------



## Sue (Dec 30, 2021)

mx wcfc said:


> I'm clutching at straws to find a way to figure out how this could go really badly for the monarchy.
> 
> Does this work?
> 
> ...


If the queen dies first, suspect it's more likely the rest of them will then fuck it up?


----------



## mx wcfc (Dec 30, 2021)

Sue said:


> If the queen dies first, suspect it's more likely the rest of them will then fuck it up?


It seems most likely the queen will die first/soon.

Charles won't be a popular king, but he'll live on for a few years, then William gets the job.

He seems to me to be popular with the likes of the mail and sun.  They love Kate and the kids.  and he is the sainted Diana's boy, who married a nice english girl.

Once "Wills" gets the job, the monarchy is safe for a generation or so.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 30, 2021)

mx wcfc said:


> Once "Wills" gets the job, the monarchy is safe for a generation or so.


15% less dull than his father and 100% less likely to talk to plants. A beige monarch, a coldplay monarch, a veritable Libdem of monarchy.


----------



## Carl Steele (Dec 30, 2021)

Kevbad the Bad said:


> My predictions for 2022.
> protect
> 2. Huge public controversy and outrage.
> 3. The Queen then dies and the monarchy is tarnished by the case.
> ...



Most people are not paying much attention to the Ghislaine Maxwell trial. I can't see anybody booing at the Queen's funeral. If you have a lot of money you can rape young girls without consequences. It's disgusting, but that's how our society works. Ghislaine will most likely broker some sort of a deal. Andrew and the rest will get off scot free.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Dec 31, 2021)

DTM_DHFC said:


> This is so so great listening in the light of the result



It's a long watch for a second innings. But if anyone fancies editing it, the cream is where he distances himself from Epstein by saying he was just the plus one to his good friend Ghislaine. The good friend who is now a convicted child sex trafficker.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 31, 2021)

Carl Steele said:


> Most people are not paying much attention to the Ghislaine Maxwell trial. I can't see anybody booing at the Queen's funeral. If you have a lot of money you can rape young girls without consequences. It's disgusting, but that's how our society works. Ghislaine will most likely broker some sort of a deal. Andrew and the rest will get off scot free.




Maxwell won’t broker a deal.

She will get near enough life.

The others will get off Scott free.


----------



## petee (Dec 31, 2021)

it's started









						Civil Lawsuit Against Former Jeffrey Epstein Assistant Dropped Following Ghislaine Maxwell Verdict
					

A civil lawsuit claiming that one of Jeffrey Epstein’s former executive assistants helped the now-deceased sex offender recruit young girls for his alleged sex trafficking scheme was voluntarily dismissed.




					lawandcrime.com
				




otoh









						Ghislaine Maxwell's Verdict Won't Close the Jeffrey Epstein Saga. Here's What to Watch Out for in the Courts.
					

Law&Crime breaks down what's next now that Ghislaine Maxwell has been convicted of sex trafficking and other crimes. Here's what to look for at sentencing, appeal and other litigation.




					lawandcrime.com
				




this second article is comprehensive and people should read it.


----------



## andysays (Dec 31, 2021)

Sounds like he's really clutching at straws now



What next, 'I'd be happy to clear my name, but I'm concerned it might upset my dear old mum...'?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 31, 2021)

andysays said:


> Sounds like he's really clutching at straws now
> 
> View attachment 303845
> 
> What next, 'I'd be happy to clear my name, but I'm concerned it might upset my dear old mum...'?



He’s right. Should do the honourable thing and set off for New York immediately and sort this mess out, rather than having bouffant barristers argue technicalities. Perhaps ask mummy if he may don an admiral’s uniform?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 31, 2021)

Ah, the "you have to drop the charges cos it will upset my poor old mum" defence.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 31, 2021)

Has he broken off his friendship with Maxwell yet? Maybe whilst in New York he could do so, perhaps stay with her for a few days, the Brooklyn nick is a convenient place to stay…


----------



## BigMoaner (Dec 31, 2021)

doesnt mention the prince, but a good article from the NYT about epsteins last days.









						Epstein’s Final Days: Celebrity Reminiscing and a Running Toilet
					

Newly released records show the disgraced financier living a mundane existence in jail before his suicide, while also spinning deceptions until the very end.




					www.nytimes.com


----------



## Badgers (Dec 31, 2021)




----------



## fucthest8 (Dec 31, 2021)

petee said:


> it's started
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The inference being that anyone else will just point at Maxwell and say "she did it, I wasn't involved", am I reading that right?

Second article does rather make it sound like Sweaty has a good chance of getting away with it. Fucksake


----------



## fucthest8 (Dec 31, 2021)

For those who can't be arsed to read it and didn't already know about this:

"A little less than an hour before the jury reached a verdict, two federal judges in the same courthouse ordered the unsealing of a 2009 settlement deal between Giuffre and Epstein. The document will become public on Jan. 3, one day before the next court match-up between Giuffre and the U.K.’s Prince Andrew. The timing is significant: Andrew’s attorneys have argued that the agreement shields their client from litigation."


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 31, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> He’s right. Should do the honourable thing and set off for New York immediately and sort this mess out, rather than having bouffant barristers argue technicalities. Perhaps ask mummy if he may don an admiral’s uniform?


He should wear the only uniform he deserves, marked with the broad arrow of the royal convict


----------



## Aladdin (Dec 31, 2021)

Kevbad the Bad said:


> My predictions for 2022.
> 1. Andrew refuses to go to the US for the trial, and is supported by the Queen.
> 2. Huge public controversy and outrage.
> 3. The Queen then dies and the monarchy is tarnished by the case.
> ...




1. Andrew will not last the year
2. Queen will not last the year.
3. Charles will not last the year.
4. William will take it on but turn it into something like the Danish monarchy... a symbolic figurehead.
6. William will be king but will not rule for that long. He will not see 65.  George will not want to he king so Charlotte will take it on and she will be Queen until she dies in her 90s. Charlotte will have no children. And the line will pass to one of George's twins. They decide to alternate and carry out the duties as one...taking breaks every second year. They have no children so when they die the monarchy reverts to a child of Louis who by then is in their 60s. They will be the last monarch of England. 

😁


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 31, 2021)

Sugar Kane said:


> 1. Andrew will not last the year
> 2. Queen will not last the year.
> 3. Charles will not last the year.
> 4. William will take it on but turn it into something like the Danish monarchy... a symbolic figurehead.
> ...



If all that turns out to be correct I will send a whole pound to the server fund. You have my word.


----------



## keybored (Dec 31, 2021)

andysays said:


> View attachment 303845


Lost me at "friends".


----------



## Aladdin (Dec 31, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> If all that turns out to be correct I will send a whole pound to the server fund. You have my word.



Deal 👍 and I will match that pound!


----------



## Cerv (Dec 31, 2021)

Kevbad the Bad said:


> My predictions for 2022.
> 1. Andrew refuses to go to the US for the trial, and is supported by the Queen.
> 2. Huge public controversy and outrage.
> 3. The Queen then dies and the monarchy is tarnished by the case.
> ...


the unlikely part there is that anyone who'd even think for a second about booing at the funeral would be allowed within miles of the event.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 31, 2021)




----------



## Carl Steele (Dec 31, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Maxwell won’t broker a deal.
> 
> She will get near enough life.



There's always the possibility that Maxwell will die in prison in the not too distant future, particularly if she's feeling desperate and trying to use what she knows to get a deal. She'll have to hope she's not put on suicide watch.


----------



## xenon (Dec 31, 2021)

Sugar Kane said:


> 1. Andrew will not last the year
> 2. Queen will not last the year.
> 3. Charles will not last the year.
> 4. William will take it on but turn it into something like the Danish monarchy... a symbolic figurehead.
> 6. William will be king but will not rule for that long. He will not see 65.  George will not want to he king so Charlotte will take it on and she will be Queen until she dies in her 90s. Charlotte will have no children. And the line will pass to one of George's twins. They decide to alternate and carry out the duties as one...taking breaks every second year. They have no children so when they die the monarchy reverts to a child of Louis who by then is in their 60s. They will be the last monarch of England.





Sugar Kane said:


> 😁



What happened to 5?


----------



## seeformiles (Dec 31, 2021)

Looks like he might have to prove his Royal dryness:



			‘No documents in Prince Andrew’s possession’ to prove inability to sweat claim


----------



## Aladdin (Dec 31, 2021)

xenon said:


> What happened to 5?



5 is when the metaverse looped and swung us all into an alternate reality


----------



## fishfinger (Dec 31, 2021)

Sugar Kane said:


> 5 is when the metaverse looped and swung us all into an alternate reality


I wish it wouldn't do that. It plays havoc with my sinuses.


----------



## High Voltage (Dec 31, 2021)

Sugar Kane said:


> 1. Andrew will not last the year
> 2. Queen will not last the year.
> 3. Charles will not last the year.
> 4. William will take it on but turn it into something like the Danish monarchy... a symbolic figurehead.
> ...


But what happened to . . . 5

I've done my research and there should be a 5 there . . . is this some "sign"


----------



## dessiato (Dec 31, 2021)

High Voltage said:


> But what happened to . . . 5
> 
> I've done my research and there should be a 5 there . . . is this some "sign"



5 is when the metaverse looped and swung us all into an alternate reality


----------



## High Voltage (Dec 31, 2021)

dessiato said:


> 5 is when the metaverse looped and swung us all into an alternate reality


I've heard this . . . but <really>


----------



## MickiQ (Dec 31, 2021)

Apparently the thing next week is just a pre-trial to decide if there will be a trial which probably won't take place until the end of next year.
I thought it was the trial proper but seems not.
On the bright side if all goes well he has another year of (not)sweating ahead of him.


----------



## DTM_DHFC (Dec 31, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> It's a long watch for a second innings. But if anyone fancies editing it, the cream is where he distances himself from Epstein by saying he was just the plus one to his good friend Ghislaine. The good friend who is now a convicted child sex trafficker.


I don’t agree.  I think the whole interview is today COMICAL GOLD


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 31, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> It's a long watch for a second innings. But if anyone fancies editing it, the cream is where he distances himself from Epstein by saying he was just the plus one to his good friend Ghislaine. The good friend who is now a convicted child sex trafficker.


Time mark, anyone?


----------



## Badgers (Dec 31, 2021)

seeformiles said:


> Looks like he might have to prove his Royal dryness:
> 
> 
> 
> ‘No documents in Prince Andrew’s possession’ to prove inability to sweat claim


Oh YES 😁


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 31, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> Apparently the thing next week is just a pre-trial to decide if there will be a trial which probably won't take place until the end of next year.
> I thought it was the trial proper but seems not.
> On the bright side if all goes well he has another year of (not)sweating ahead of him.



A nasty paedo-cloud over Brenda’s jubilee shindig 🥳


----------



## Wilf (Dec 31, 2021)

Magnus McGinty said:


> It's a long watch for a second innings. But if anyone fancies editing it, the cream is where he distances himself from Epstein by saying he was just the plus one to his good friend Ghislaine. The good friend who is now a convicted child sex trafficker.


Yep, I was watching it with that in mind last night. Could imagine an edit with pictures of Ghislaine in handcuffs every time he mentions her.  Bit like saying, 'oh, no, Gary Glitter wasn't my special friend, I only really knew him through Rolf'.


----------



## Aladdin (Dec 31, 2021)

High Voltage said:


> But what happened to . . . 5
> 
> I've done my research and there should be a 5 there . . . is this some "sign"





High Voltage said:


> I've heard this . . . but <really>




Clearly you have already been catapulted into a different alternate reality


Sigh....


----------



## quiet guy (Dec 31, 2021)

seeformiles said:


> Looks like he might have to prove his Royal dryness:
> 
> 
> 
> ‘No documents in Prince Andrew’s possession’ to prove inability to sweat claim


He'll use the Mets excuse that it's historical and can't be investigated


----------



## Wilf (Dec 31, 2021)

So if the ninth in line to the throne gets off, he'll be using the _Dershovitz Defence_.  'Look, look! It says that all these nonces can't be sued!  And well, _I'm _a ...'.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 31, 2021)

quiet guy said:


> He'll use the Mets excuse that it's historical and can't be investigated


Didn't he say in the Newsnight interview that he _used to have_ this condition?  He's like some kid explaining a broken window, his lies get more and more convoluted and have an inbuilt absurdity,


----------



## tim (Dec 31, 2021)

Cerv said:


> the unlikely part there is that anyone who'd even think for a second about booing at the funeral would be allowed within miles of the event.



The cortège will be a public event. It would be impossible to keep people who want to spontaneously boo off the streets. She will also lie in state in public view to anyone who can be bothered to queue for hours so if you are willing to wait you could boo her corpse in a more intimate setting


----------



## quiet guy (Dec 31, 2021)

Don't think it's her they'll boo, more likely to be the Nonce as he rides by in one of his dress up uniforms.


----------



## Storm Fox (Dec 31, 2021)

Jan Moir's take on the victims:


> The age of enlightenment?​The youngest victim in the Epstein/Maxwell scandal was 14, and most were in their mid to late teens. Which makes me wonder, at what age does someone move from child-victim status into a person who is responsible for their own actions?
> 
> When she was 15, Greta Thunberg began the school strikes and public speeches, which made her an internationally recognised climate activist.
> 
> ...



From JAN MOIR: Strip private jets and Ghislaine is Rotherham all over again
and from the same column she is having a pop at Emma Watson


----------



## Fluffy clouds (Dec 31, 2021)

Shame on you


----------



## Aladdin (Dec 31, 2021)

Storm Fox said:


> Jan Moir's take on the victims:
> 
> 
> From JAN MOIR: Strip private jets and Ghislaine is Rotherham all over again
> and from the same column she is having a pop at Emma Watson


Jan Moir is obviously a tit.

There's a big difference between IQ and EQ... 
A 15 yr old fighting global warming is still s 15 yr old...not an adult.


----------



## TopCat (Dec 31, 2021)

BBC criticised for giving Ian Maxwell airtime to defend sister Ghislaine
					

Brother protested her innocence of sex offences in five-minute interview on Radio 4’s Today programme




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## UrbaneFox (Dec 31, 2021)

Weller said:


> Perhaps  she didn't waste her time whilst avoiding detection in hiding pulling in  in a few cash favors from the rich and famous  she "helped"  in the past when she took the tin foil off her mobile phone
> I had expected to hear more about those people  during the trial as it was reported they tracked her down via her data usage
> Im a bit pissed that before Epsteins death they said they  had so much data from a diary and photos videos etc from his homes  etc  yet we've heard little  about that evidence who were in their visitors or contacts , customers  list etc and now may never
> Hopefully she will spill some beans or someone else will once appeals over etc I dont know much about the law but can she do that now in appeal etc
> ...


Epstein's address book is online, he had millions of 'friends' and somewhere on Instagram is an account dedicated to photos of Ghislaine Maxwell with celeb friends. I suspect the show is far from over.


----------



## weltweit (Dec 31, 2021)

DTM_DHFC said:


> This is so so great listening in the light of the result



4:52 just a straightforward shooting weekend 

12:40 by my tendency to be too honourable


----------



## DTM_DHFC (Dec 31, 2021)

weltweit said:


> 4:52 just a straightforward shooting weekend
> 
> 12:40 by my tendency to be too honourable


Absolute comedy gold 😂


----------



## Wilf (Dec 31, 2021)

Quite impressed by Prince Noncey Pants lawyer using this line:



> Andrew’s lawyer, Andrew Brettler, has rejected this on the grounds that it is “harassing and* seeks confidential and private information* and documents that are irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.


Erm, let's just reflect for a moment: _who was it who introduced the Arid Extra Dry revelations into the public domain in the first place?_


----------



## TopCat (Dec 31, 2021)

6m in. Reminds us he was Patron Saint (sp?) of the NSPCC and mentions the "Full Stop" campaign.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 31, 2021)

TopCat said:


> 6m in. Reminds us he was Patron Saint (sp?) of the NSPCC and mentions the "Full Stop" campaign.


'_I knew all the signs - in fact I should have stopped myself'_


----------



## TopCat (Dec 31, 2021)

11:39 he says he never went to a i'm free to rape kids party. He then says he did go but it wasn't a party, just a dinner party with 8-10 of "us".


----------



## Wilf (Dec 31, 2021)

_'King Herod has agreed to step down from his role with the NSPCC'_


----------



## Wilf (Dec 31, 2021)

TopCat said:


> 11:39 he says he never went to a i'm free to rape kids party. He then says he did go but it wasn't a party, just a dinner party with 8-10 of "us".


Ah yes, the long goodbye to Epstein.  A full week to say you can't be pals with a convicted nonce.  

In all of his multiple interactions with Epstein, I do wonder how many of his staff he took with him?  They don't seem to have been interviewed.  Can't see him carrying his own bag to be honest.


----------



## TopCat (Dec 31, 2021)

The sweating stuff, he is so obviously lying. I thinks it's around this point that his interviewer starts to look at him like he rapes children.


----------



## TopCat (Dec 31, 2021)

I can't take any more. 
#passthebaton


----------



## Hollis (Dec 31, 2021)

Sorry if this has been posted before.. _chortle_


----------



## 1927 (Dec 31, 2021)

Wilf said:


> Quite impressed by Prince Noncey Pants lawyer using this line:
> 
> 
> Erm, let's just reflect for a moment: _who was it who introduced the Arid Extra Dry revelations into the public domain in the first place?_


Surely the point is that if he can show this to be a lie then anything else he says has to be suspect. as that is part of his counter claim against Guiffre.


----------



## scalyboy (Dec 31, 2021)

Badgers said:


> Oh YES 😁


Lock the bastard in a funky Shoreditch sauna with this tune playing on repeat


----------



## T & P (Dec 31, 2021)

seeformiles said:


> Looks like he might have to prove his Royal dryness:
> 
> 
> 
> ‘No documents in Prince Andrew’s possession’ to prove inability to sweat claim


In the days after the Panorama interview a friend at work came in the morning and said he’d just heard on a news radio station, can’t remember which one, an interview with a doctor in which he was asked if it was really possible for someone to stop sweating through PSTD, and he said it was basically complete bollocks, if not in as many words.


----------



## Chilli.s (Dec 31, 2021)

TopCat said:


> BBC criticised for giving Ian Maxwell airtime to defend sister Ghislaine
> 
> 
> Brother protested her innocence of sex offences in five-minute interview on Radio 4’s Today programme
> ...


Yeah they had a distasteful interview with him at the start of the trial too with plenty of waffle about how innocent she is. Disgusting imho particularly in view of the guilty verdict. Also gave him a platform to bleat about his own innocence from his fathers many crimes. Very poor.


----------



## seeformiles (Dec 31, 2021)

T & P said:


> In the days after the Panorama interview a friend at work came in the morning and said he’d just heard on a news radio station, can’t remember which one, an interview with a doctor and ask him if it was really possible for someone to stop sweating through PSTD, and he said it was basically complete bollocks, if not in as many words.



I read that the medical concensus was that an excess of adrenalin would tend to cause more sweating rather than less or none at all.


----------



## Part 2 (Dec 31, 2021)

T & P said:


> In the days after the Panorama interview a friend at work came in the morning and said he’d just heard on a news radio station, can’t remember which one, an interview with a doctor and ask him if it was really possible for someone to stop sweating through PSTD, and he said it was basically complete bollocks, if not in as many words.



He obvs doesn't know about the symptoms of Pedo Talks Shit Disease.


----------



## tim (Dec 31, 2021)

Andrew Neil, on the one hand, a fierce defender of his own reputation:

Andrew Neil threatens to sue Jennifer Arcuri after tweet about Epstein


And on the other, a scourge of the depraved and powerful:



Being the upright, respectable chap he is he must be irked by this



> Mr Alessi described Ms Maxwell as “the lady of the house” at the Palm Beach property in El Brillo Way, and said she maintained strict control over staff.



Epstein had Maxwell photos removed from Palm Beach when entertaining female guests


----------



## Badgers (Dec 31, 2021)




----------



## two sheds (Dec 31, 2021)

Was this posted above? Quite short and good with highlights at 0.50 and 3.50


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 31, 2021)

Seems the Grand Old Duke’s lawyers have admitted the sweating thing was bullshit and the judge has ruled Virginia Guiffre is a US resident so the trial can go ahead.

Happy New Year 🥳


----------



## dessiato (Dec 31, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Seems the Grand Old Duke’s lawyers have admitted the sweating thing was bullshit and the judge has ruled Virginia Guiffre is a US resident so the trial can go ahead.
> 
> Happy New Year 🥳


Got to ask, source? I don't want this to be wrong, and I want proof for when I wind up my royalist friend.


----------



## mango5 (Dec 31, 2021)

I called everyone in Jeffrey Epstein's little black book.
					

What I learned about rich people, conspiracy, Ghislaine, stand-up comedy, and evil from 2,000 phone calls.




					www.motherjones.com
				




Redacted version of at least one of the address books also easily found JFGI


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 31, 2021)

dessiato said:


> Got to ask, source? I don't want this to be wrong, and I want proof for when I wind up my royalist friend.





HateMail; And the judge denied Andrew's requests to delay the case after he claimed Miss Roberts cannot sue in the US on the grounds that she lives in Australia.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 31, 2021)

Oh and the sweating nonsense…

Lawyers for his accuser Miss Roberts, who is suing the prince for damages in a New York civil case, have demanded he hand over evidence he does not perspire, as he said in a car crash Newsnight interview two years ago when denying her allegations.

But his legal team said 'no documents exist in his possession, custody or control' to back the claim.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Dec 31, 2021)

seeformiles said:


> I read that the medical concensus was that an excess of adrenalin would tend to cause more sweating rather than less or none at all.



I’m surprised (or perhaps not) that there hasn’t been more vigorous interrogation of this by the British Press given it simply sounds like bollocks.


----------



## tim (Jan 1, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> I’m surprised (or perhaps not) that there hasn’t been more vigorous interrogation of this by the British Press given it simply sounds like bollocks.


Yes, but bone-dry bollocks.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 1, 2022)

tim said:


> Yes, but bone-dry bollocks.


Sure Extreme Ultra Dry bollocks, neck, chest, armpits....

Er, sorry, what was the question? No, I never remember the names of randoms I - how do I put this? -


----------



## weltweit (Jan 1, 2022)

Anyone have any sympathy with the idea Maxwell might have also been a bit of a victim. Her youth can't have been very normal with her dad, then she found this guy Epstein, who was also bad news but she stayed with him, why? Not to forgive what she did, but just to suggest she might have been damaged goods also.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Jan 1, 2022)

weltweit said:


> Anyone have any sympathy with the idea Maxwell might have also been a bit of a victim. Her youth can't have been very normal with her dad, then she found this guy Epstein, who was also bad news but she stayed with him, why? Not to forgive what she did, but just to suggest she might have been damaged goods also.


No


----------



## Steel Icarus (Jan 1, 2022)

I mean damaged goods maybe, sympathy none


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 1, 2022)

weltweit said:


> Anyone have any sympathy with the idea Maxwell might have also been a bit of a victim. Her youth can't have been very normal with her dad, then she found this guy Epstein, who was also bad news but she stayed with him, why? Not to forgive what she did, but just to suggest she might have been damaged goods also.



Born into unimaginable wealth. Sounds terrible.
Although there’s definitely an argument that misogyny means she takes the hit whilst all the rich old white privileged men get away with it.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 1, 2022)

weltweit said:


> Anyone have any sympathy with the idea Maxwell might have also been a bit of a victim. Her youth can't have been very normal with her dad, then she found this guy Epstein, who was also bad news but she stayed with him, why? Not to forgive what she did, but just to suggest she might have been damaged goods also.


Have heard stories from people who knew her back then that strongly suggest she was abused by her father and learned from that how to appease powerful men. Not that any of that excuses her - the world has far too many abused people, most of whom grew up differently and determined to right wrongs. And people aren't machines. They react differently to trauma. 
But it might go some way to explain why she took the power-pleasing way out, and how she was able to shut out other people's suffering. As if any of this could be comprehendible.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 1, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> Have heard stories from people who knew her back then that strongly suggest she was abused by her father and learned from that how to appease powerful men. Not that any of that excuses her - the world has far too many abused people, most of whom grew up differently and determined to right wrongs. And people aren't machines. They react differently to trauma.
> But it might go some way to explain why she took the power-pleasing way out, and how she was able to shut out other people's suffering. As if any of this could be comprehendible.



She also has agency and opportunities that others could only dream of. Which didn’t limit her to Epstein whatsoever.


----------



## 1927 (Jan 1, 2022)

mango5 said:


> I called everyone in Jeffrey Epstein's little black book.
> 
> 
> What I learned about rich people, conspiracy, Ghislaine, stand-up comedy, and evil from 2,000 phone calls.
> ...


Has anyone read that entire article? shocking.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 1, 2022)

.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 1, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> She also has agency and opportunities that others could only dream of. Which didn’t limit her to Epstein whatsoever.


Yes. If anyone had the opportunity to break free, with money and education and connections, she did.
But she didn't.
We will never know why. Even if she writes her best-selling memoir in choky, it won't be telling the truth.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 1, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> Yes. If anyone had the opportunity to break free, with money and education and connections, she did.
> But she didn't.
> We will never know why. Even if she writes her best-selling memoir in choky, it won't be telling the truth.


She made a simple contract with Epstein where upon he would unlock untold wealth to her disposal and she would go along with his wishes. It wasn't done at gun point.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 1, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> She made a simple contract with Epstein where upon he would unlock untold wealth to her disposal and she would go along with his wishes. It wasn't done at gun point.


It sounds like that. Or maybe it was as much emotional as financial. What switched off her moral compass, or was she born without one?


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 1, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> It sounds like that. Or maybe it was as much emotional as financial. What switched off her moral compass, or was she born without one?


What switched off his? Or Andrew's?


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 1, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> What switched off his?


It's weird isn't it? Some people are too selfish and greedy. It would solve so many problems if we could only locate what tips them over, or maybe argue better for our own standards.


----------



## weltweit (Jan 1, 2022)

It seems odd to me that Andrew is the only man being pursued as an abuser. It seems unlikely he was the only one and Epstein's contacts book must be filled with the contact details of the rich and prominent. Perhaps other victims of Epstein and Maxwell will come forward in the coming months and name new names.


----------



## mx wcfc (Jan 1, 2022)

weltweit said:


> It seems odd to me that Andrew is the only man being pursued as an abuser. It seems unlikely he was the only one and Epstein's contacts book must be filled with the contact details of the rich and prominent. Perhaps other victims of Epstein and Maxwell will come forward in the coming months and name new names.


Let's hope so, eh?


----------



## weltweit (Jan 1, 2022)

I suppose in Andrew's case there is the testimony, AND there is that photo!


----------



## MrSki (Jan 1, 2022)

weltweit said:


> It seems odd to me that Andrew is the only man being pursued as an abuser. It seems unlikely he was the only one and Epstein's contacts book must be filled with the contact details of the rich and prominent. Perhaps other victims of Epstein and Maxwell will come forward in the coming months and name new names.


Yeah but he was the only one stupid enough to go & spend a week with him saying fond good-byes after he got out from the first sentence.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 1, 2022)

weltweit said:


> It seems odd to me that Andrew is the only man being pursued as an abuser. It seems unlikely he was the only one and Epstein's contacts book must be filled with the contact details of the rich and prominent. Perhaps other victims of Epstein and Maxwell will come forward in the coming months and name new names.


I think the thing is that if you accuse someone other than in the context of legal proceedings then you open yourself up to being sued. So you can only really name someone if you have some sort of evidence beyond your own words.


----------



## keybored (Jan 1, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> It sounds like that. Or maybe it was as much emotional as financial. What switched off her moral compass, or was she born without one?


You realise who her dad was?


----------



## weltweit (Jan 1, 2022)

MrSki said:


> Yeah but he was the only one stupid enough to go & spend a week with him saying fond good-byes after he got out from the first sentence.


He is obviously just too honourable :/


----------



## weltweit (Jan 1, 2022)

keybored said:


> You realise who her dad was?


Yup, a massive bully, con man and thief on a very large scale.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 1, 2022)

weltweit said:


> I suppose in Andrew's case there is the testimony, AND there is that photo!





MrSki said:


> Yeah but he was the only one stupid enough to go & spend a week with him saying fond good-byes after he got out from the first sentence.


But he didn't spend a week 'with him' - the mansion was like a railway station! He hardly saw him! And he certainly didn't notice any trafficked girls! 
One doesn't interact with the staff beyond a polite hello, don't you know?


----------



## 1927 (Jan 1, 2022)

weltweit said:


> It seems odd to me that Andrew is the only man being pursued as an abuser. It seems unlikely he was the only one and Epstein's contacts book must be filled with the contact details of the rich and prominent. Perhaps other victims of Epstein and Maxwell will come forward in the coming months and name new names.


Read the article posted earlier.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 1, 2022)

Fuck her. It was greed. She grew up with billionaire wealth, when it turned out that her dad was a common tealeaf she could have taken the few million sloshing around and her £80k a year trust fund and lived a life of ease. But she chose to go for the billionaire life and she chose that providing a paedo with victims would allow her to live as she wished. Well, the piper is now to be paid. Fuck her.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 1, 2022)

keybored said:


> You realise who her dad was?


Good grief. 
Everyone knows who her dad was, unless you're suggesting he was someone even worse? 

_scratches head for someone worse than Maxwell_


----------



## keybored (Jan 1, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> Good grief.
> Everyone knows who her dad was, unless you're suggesting he was someone even worse?
> 
> _scratches head for someone worse than Maxwell_


Apologies, I assumed you had no clue.


bluescreen said:


> It sounds like that. Or maybe it was as much emotional as financial. What switched off her moral compass, or was she born without one?


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 1, 2022)

keybored said:


> Apologies, I assumed you had no clue.


I'm naive enough to believe that someone could be born with a clean slate. I'd still like to think that a person could rise above a father like Maxwell. 
Ghislaine didn't.


----------



## keybored (Jan 1, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> I'm naive enough to believe that someone could be born with a clean slate. I'd still like to think that a person could rise above a father like Maxwell.
> Ghislaine didn't.


He was a fucking huge influence on her, from her birth to his skinny-dipping misadventure.


----------



## Weller (Jan 1, 2022)

weltweit said:


> It seems odd to me that Andrew is the only man being pursued as an abuser. It seems unlikely he was the only one and Epstein's contacts book must be filled with the contact details of the rich and prominent. Perhaps other victims of Epstein and Maxwell will come forward in the coming months and name new names.


Who knows what may happen in U.S.A where they seemed to operate mostly but there have been  a few very powerful people connected to Maxwell and Epsteins "Lolita Expresss" over the years and protected in his previous conviction  deal but accusers usually get  paid or frightened off and drop law suits before  court  as did  Trump and Epsteins  accuser

Andrews accuser is somewhere hiding in Australia isnt she still but it must be a very frightening thing to speak out against these sort of people knowing you will have to spend the rest of your days looking over your shoulder or escaping to a new life in another  country  which was impossible  for most of these girls considering their backgrounds

But we are living in strange times some seem to think that the only reason Epstein got banged up again was because the US.A wanted to right wrongs and clean up the past as Epsteins first prison sentence for under age sex was seen as a joke , he got out in under a year and even whilst in was allowed out to his office during the day
The original deal he struck also stopped others being named or pursued even including Ghislane I think  

Ive followed this story off and on for many years due to Robert Maxwell stealing pension money many years ago and was a very dodgy man as was most his family  so its been a long time coming heres hoping Ghislane talks  but unless there really is a new  will in the US  I cant see it happening

Gone on too long happy new year and who knows nothing would surprise me for 2022 after 2021  



> The woman, who had  filed suit earlier this year under the pseudonym Jane Doe, had alleged that Trump and billionaire Jeffrey Epstein had raped her in 1994, when she was a 13-year-old aspiring model.



Woman who accused Donald Trump of raping her at 13 drops lawsuit


----------



## Ming (Jan 1, 2022)

What’s that term meaning ‘all are equal before the law’.…lol.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 1, 2022)

keybored said:


> He was a fucking huge influence on her, from her birth to his skinny-dipping misadventure.


Not sure what you're saying here, or even if we're disagreeing. He was a massive influence, obvs, and a massive, massive monster. She was his 'favourite' and god knows what that involved. I've heard suggestions. We're in the territory of trying to understand rather than excuse. The mind recoils, tbh, and the wonder is that anyone would end up even half sane.


----------



## tim (Jan 1, 2022)

weltweit said:


> It seems odd to me that Andrew is the only man being pursued as an abuser. It seems unlikely he was the only one and Epstein's contacts book must be filled with the contact details of the rich and prominent. Perhaps other victims of Epstein and Maxwell will come forward in the coming months and name new names.



He's being "pursued" by Virginia Giuffre who was just one of the victims not by the state. She's also tried to bring a case against Dershowitz which he seems to have had success in blocking. The time elapsed since the abuse took place seems to make it harder to bring cases against this lot. The fact that both Trump and Bill Clinton were guests of Epstein means that there is little to be gained by either Democrats or Republicans if bigger fish were to be fried, at least everyone can safely hate a depraved and unlikable British prince.


1927 said:


> Has anyone read that entire article? shocking.


There's quite a lot more about the importance of Andrew of York who gave Epstein access to the world of the posh elite rather than to just the nouveau riche elite.



> “Ghislaine was a shark,” Julie told me, “Anything you read about her that’s positive isn’t true. She’s a scary woman….The picture that Virginia [Giuffre] drew of Ghislaine? I completely believe what she wrote.” Julie told me Maxwell was Epstein’s ticket into proper high society. ”Jeffrey had money, Ghislaine had status,” Julie said. It was Maxwell who introduced Epstein to Prince Andrew, eighth in line to the British throne. In an affidavit, Giuffre claimed she was forced to have sex with Prince Andrew multiple times in multiple locations. (Giuffre was attempting to join a lawsuit against Alan Dershowitz, who succeeded in keeping other plaintiffs off the case; her affidavit was struck from the record in 2015.) Included in the affidavit was a 2001 photo of Andrew with his arms around Giuffre’s waist, a smiling Maxwell in the background.



There are also allegations that Andrew of Neil, was at least for a time in the same New York clique and not just someone who had met Maxwell on a couple of occasions in the distant past.



> Shuster was fresh out of college when she ran into Epstein and Maxwell at a social event in New York. “I just thought Ghislaine was so glamorous.” Shuster was working for Andrew Neil, then one of Rupert Murdoch’s top lieutenants, at what would become Fox News, and according to Shuster there was a great deal of overlap between Epstein’s and Neil’s social circles. A few days after meeting Epstein, Ghislaine called Shuster and told her that Jeffrey would like to have lunch with her at his townhouse in New York.




I keep getting this popping up on YouTube. Please, do me a favour and add a dose of invective to the replies.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 1, 2022)

Weller said:


> Andrews accuser is somewhere hiding in Australia isnt she


Think she does live in Australia, but I'm not sure that counts as hiding.


----------



## Weller (Jan 1, 2022)

Raheem said:


> Think she does live in Australia, but I'm not sure that counts as hiding.


She said she was extremely frightened and seemed it she  was now living by the beach hiding far away from people with cctv cameras everywhere protected by her husbands family   in the last documentary I saw couple of years back

She did come under a lot of media as well as public attacks and did go into hiding at one stage  though she has done a fair few interviews over the years since the Prince Andrew photo was released and her identity and whereabouts became known


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 1, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> It's weird isn't it? Some people are too selfish and greedy. It would solve so many problems if we could only locate what tips them over, or maybe argue better for our own standards.



As light on analysis it is; money corrupts absolutely.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 1, 2022)

I meant power but the same thing.


----------



## weltweit (Jan 1, 2022)




----------



## Chilli.s (Jan 1, 2022)

weltweit said:


> Anyone have any sympathy with the idea Maxwell might have also been a bit of a victim. Her youth can't have been very normal with her dad, then she found this guy Epstein, who was also bad news but she stayed with him, why? Not to forgive what she did, but just to suggest she might have been damaged goods also.


She's had a life of much opportunity but ultimately made the decisions to do what she's done on her own. Privilege is what she has had, in every way, unconstrained by the mundane things that govern most peoples lives. Could have done anything but chose to do selfish abusive things that harmed other less fortunate people.


----------



## Chilli.s (Jan 1, 2022)

weltweit said:


> It seems odd to me that Andrew is the only man being pursued as an abuser. It seems unlikely he was the only one and Epstein's contacts book must be filled with the contact details of the rich and prominent. Perhaps other victims of Epstein and Maxwell will come forward in the coming months and name new names.


It is odd that he's the only one, so far.

He has set himself up for it though, the car crash interview. He, like Maxwell sees himself as some kind of elite higher being. Indeed he thinks that the no sweat thing proves he is actually some kind of special and that we should swallow down that ballshit without question.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 1, 2022)

I don't think she did it for money. It was the  power. People like that get their kicks from forcing others to submit to their will. Same with Jimmy Saville. Was probably the core driver in her relationship with Epstein.


----------



## kenny g (Jan 1, 2022)

weltweit said:


>



That has alarm bells all over it. I get the distinct impression that the dinners had a bit more than steak on the menu...


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Jan 1, 2022)

weltweit said:


> Anyone have any sympathy with the idea Maxwell might have also been a bit of a victim. Her youth can't have been very normal with her dad, then she found this guy Epstein, who was also bad news but she stayed with him, why? Not to forgive what she did, but just to suggest she might have been damaged goods also.


Yes, to a degree.  I read that she was bullied and beaten by her father when she was a child, and then strived to please him when she was a little older.  

It wasn't a healthy start, to be sure.

Yes, the family had money and privilege but that doesn't negate the fact that her upbringing was abusive.


----------



## Athos (Jan 1, 2022)

weltweit said:


> It seems odd to me that Andrew is the only man being pursued as an abuser. It seems unlikely he was the only one and Epstein's contacts book must be filled with the contact details of the rich and prominent. Perhaps other victims of Epstein and Maxwell will come forward in the coming months and name new names.


She did go after Dershowitz.

It could be that there's insufficient evidence against others; there's too much risk of losing and having to pay costs.  Or that they're more obviously caught by the previous settlement agreement.

Or maybe she and other victims are biding their time, hoping that success in the Maxwell prosecution and/or civil proceedings against His Royal Definitely-not-a-sweaty-noceness will encourage others to settle.

But perhaps others have been threatened with proceedings, but settled with confidentiality conditions.


----------



## mango5 (Jan 1, 2022)

1927 said:


> Has anyone read that entire article? shocking.


Yes. It's long but very readable. I bet there was tons of talk from people deflecting attention to others. Likely lots of hearsay/circumstantial material to follow up for anyone hoping to build a case.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 1, 2022)

ElizabethofYork said:


> Yes, to a degree.  I read that she was bullied and beaten by her father when she was a child, and then strived to please him when she was a little older.
> 
> It wasn't a healthy start, to be sure.
> 
> Yes, the family had money and privilege but that doesn't negate the fact that her upbringing was abusive.


Millions of people have abusive upbringings and remain decent human beings. Its an  obvious and major  factor in mental health problems and substance abuse in adulthood, but not in being a vile piece of shit. Fuck her.


----------



## LDC (Jan 1, 2022)

weltweit said:


> Anyone have any sympathy with the idea Maxwell might have also been a bit of a victim. Her youth can't have been very normal with her dad, then she found this guy Epstein, who was also bad news but she stayed with him, why? Not to forgive what she did, but just to suggest she might have been damaged goods also.



Not sympathy, but it's hardly news that abusers have often been abused in some way themselves, things are very complicated in life and don't divide neatly into purely good/bad etc.

But that doesn't mean anything in terms of her having to be responsible for her own actions.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 1, 2022)

weltweit said:


>



Yeah, I’ve seen that before.  Those answers.  😬


----------



## Badgers (Jan 1, 2022)

Inside Teterboro Airport, NYC's private jet airport, where celebrities slip in unnoticed and Jeffrey Epstein was arrested on sex trafficking charges a month before his death
					

The New Jersey airport is only 12 miles from Manhattan and has amenities like lounges, a gym, a private movie theater, and limo concierge services.




					www.businessinsider.com
				






> Just 12 miles from New York City, Teterboro Airport in New Jersey is the city's primary private jet airport.
> 
> Teterboro is a general aviation airport, which means its main purpose is to remove smaller, slower aircraft — i.e. private jets — from the regional air traffic and reduce congestion at the commercial airports such as Newark Liberty International Airport, John F. Kennedy International Airport, and LaGuardia Airport.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 1, 2022)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> abusers have often been abused in some way themselves,



but is there any actual evidence for this?


----------



## Aladdin (Jan 1, 2022)

weltweit said:


>




He's very uncomfortable in that interview.
Notice how he pulls on his ring finger after she asks about him meeting Epstein?
Dodgy as fuck. 
And his answers are pathetic. 

Epstein obviously got to a lot of people in power. And many must be worried that their relationship will be found out.


----------



## Thora (Jan 1, 2022)

weltweit said:


> Anyone have any sympathy with the idea Maxwell might have also been a bit of a victim. Her youth can't have been very normal with her dad, then she found this guy Epstein, who was also bad news but she stayed with him, why? Not to forgive what she did, but just to suggest she might have been damaged goods also.


I’m sure she was “damaged”, but mainly she was prepared to do whatever she needed to in order to maintain the billionaire lifestyle. She wasn’t going to be content living in a small apartment and just being well off.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 1, 2022)

Thora said:


> I’m sure she was “damaged”, but mainly she was prepared to do whatever she needed to in order to maintain the billionaire lifestyle. She wasn’t going to be content living in a small apartment and just being well off.


She didn't do it as a means to an end. She enjoyed it.


----------



## LDC (Jan 1, 2022)

Kaka Tim said:


> but is there any actual evidence for this?



If you mean specifically with her, no idea. I was responding to the general point when someone asked about sympathy for her as it was suggested her childhood was abusive.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 1, 2022)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> If you mean specifically with her, no idea. I was responding to the general point when someone asked about sympathy for her as it was suggested her childhood was abusive.


Is there link between being abused and being an abuser?


----------



## LDC (Jan 1, 2022)

Kaka Tim said:


> Is there link between being abused and being an abuser?



I can't be arsed to look for papers on it tbh, but that's my understanding from reading bits about this kinda thing and talking to people that work in the field. Not always at all, but reasonably common. But happy to be corrected if I'm talking shit! Also not interested in unpicking her reasons/history, was just a hungover comment on a post that caught my eye.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 1, 2022)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> If you mean specifically with her, no idea. I was responding to the general point when someone asked about *sympathy for her* as it was suggested her childhood was abusive.





weltweit said:


> Anyone have any *sympathy with the idea* Maxwell might have also been a bit of a victim. Her youth can't have been very normal with her dad, then she found this guy Epstein, who was also bad news but she stayed with him, why? Not to forgive what she did, but just to suggest she might have been damaged goods also.


Sympathy with the idea =/=sympathy for her. 

Let her rot.


----------



## Thora (Jan 1, 2022)

Kaka Tim said:


> Is there link between being abused and being an abuser?


Most people who are abused in childhood do not become abusers as adults.  But, abusers are more likely to have been abused in childhood than non-abusers.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 1, 2022)

Badgers said:


> Inside Teterboro Airport, NYC's private jet airport, where celebrities slip in unnoticed and Jeffrey Epstein was arrested on sex trafficking charges a month before his death
> 
> 
> The New Jersey airport is only 12 miles from Manhattan and has amenities like lounges, a gym, a private movie theater, and limo concierge services.
> ...




Of course most urbanites will have passed through there numerous times, but it’s name is wrong, it should be Tetboro, but like realtor it’s one of those American words that is just wrong and shall be corrected once we take back the wayward colony.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 1, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Of course most urbanites will have passed through there numerous times, but it’s name is wrong, it should be Tetboro, but like realtor it’s one of those American words that is just wrong and shall be corrected once we take back the wayward colony.


What would you suggest be done with the other 37 states?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 1, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> What would you suggest be done with the other 37 states?



Given to Mexico.


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Jan 1, 2022)

Calamity1971 said:


> Finally it's survivors. How fucking hard was that.


Once a script is written, it will often get copied into the rundowns for later bulletins.

Which means that a script written for, say, a 3pm bulletin will go out as written.

And then in the run-up to the 4pm bulletin, someone might take a look at the copied over script and either re-write it a bit just because they prefer to word something differently or because updates need to be added or because the script needs shortening because the airtime for it is being cut, and of course presenters will often rewrite or reword scripts to suit their preference.

[Fyi: stories generally start out longer when they're higher up the bulletin/news agenda, if they're main headlines stories, and then as other news happens and stories are replaced in the headlines, earlier stories move further down and often get less airtime and so get cropped.]

But then come the 5, and the original script might be in the bulletin from when it was copied over earlier in the day. So there's a risk of reverting to previous versions of a script. Someone might then copy over the version from the 4pm, or they might rewrite the original script, and different journalists will pick up different things...

...such as sensitivities surrounding the words 'accuser' 'victim' and 'survivor' due to some victims of such crimes not wanting to be seen as victims, but as survivors.

Accuser does sound a bit more like a term to be used pre and during trial. And someone probably made that same judgement call, ie following the guilty verdict, the accuser becomes the victim/survivor.

So when you say 'How fucking hard was that', the answer is not hard at all, in isolation, to change a word on a news bulletin script or a website news article, but in the context of being in a busy newsroom, with breaking news, developing stories, it can be quite hard to keep on top of absolutely everything.

I've worked in the control room during live news bulletins and rolling coverage of breaking news and developing stories. You might start a bulletin with a death toll of X killed in a bombing/train crash/earthquake, and then the death toll increases... and the presenter goes to read a recap of the main headlines at the top of the hour or on the half hour, or going into or out of a break, and that original main headline will still be there, and you hope someone in the main newsroom will have updated it with the new death toll of X+23 or whatever, but I'd often catch it and go in and amend the headline recap. But sometimes it slipped by in the chaos.

So in the scheme of things, not hard, but in reality, when you're juggling so many other things in live news broadcasting the occasional inappropriate word that could've and should've been changed in a more timely manner won't have been.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Jan 1, 2022)

This is the reply I got from my complaint to the BBC :

Dear Audience Member

Thank you for contacting us regarding our coverage of the Ghislaine Maxwell trial.

The interview with Alan Dershowitz after the Ghislaine Maxwell verdict did not meet the BBC’s editorial standards, as Mr Dershowitz was not a suitable person to interview as an impartial analyst, and we did not make the relevant background clear to our audience. We will look into how this happened.

Thank you again for getting in touch and for sharing your feedback.  

BBC Complaints Team


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Jan 1, 2022)

SpookyFrank said:


> BBC looking into how the Dershowitz interview happened. Real head scratcher that one.


My guess would be young freelance producer, eager to book a guest, wants to impress by booking a big name, books him at the last-ish minute without thinking things through in terms of him being an involved party, ie he's also one of the accused in the wider context of Epstein's activities.

Either that or wtf were the editor of the day and/or bulletin editor thinking.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 1, 2022)

AmateurAgitator said:


> This is the reply I got from my complaint to the BBC :
> 
> Dear Audience Member
> 
> ...




What a coincidence, my reply was word for word the same.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Jan 1, 2022)

I'm not sure how reliable the Dorset Eye is, but this caught my eye when someone posted it to a group page on facebook that I'm a member of :









						The Labour Party must now suspend Peter Mandelson
					

The purpose of the petition is to call on UK Labour Party Leader, Sir Keir Starmer, to SUSPEND Peter Mandelson’s membership of the party while ordering an independent investigation into the extent of Mandelson’s historical involvement in the sex trafficking, paedophilia and sexual blackmail...




					dorseteye.com


----------



## andysays (Jan 1, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Born into unimaginable wealth. Sounds terrible.
> Although there’s definitely an argument that misogyny means she takes the hit whilst all the rich old white privileged men get away with it.


We've yet to see whether all the rich old white privileged men do get away with it (though I fear many of them will) and we might do well to remember that the full case against Epstein never got to court because of the permanent unavailability of the accused.

So I'm not sure that the "argument" you appear to be suggesting that Maxwell is only taking the hit because of misogyny really stands up to a moment's thought, TBH.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 1, 2022)

andysays said:


> We've yet to see whether all the rich old white privileged men do get away with it (though I fear many of them will) and we might do well to remember that the full case against Epstein never got to court because of the permanent unavailability of the accused.
> 
> So I'm not sure that the "argument" you appear to be suggesting that Maxwell is only taking the hit because of misogyny really stands up to a moment's thought, TBH.



If only I hadn’t read yesterday that other women who helped facilitate the abuse might be pursued (no mention of the men at the various orgies) I might be inclined to agree.


----------



## Sprocket. (Jan 1, 2022)

I wonder if his younger brother Edward, with his interest in theatre had considered doing a royal production of Richard III.
Andrew as The Duke of Clarence, instead of stage props a real dagger and vat of wine could be used?


----------



## Wilf (Jan 1, 2022)

andysays said:


> We've yet to see whether all the rich old white privileged men do get away with it (though I fear many of them will) and we might do well to remember that the full case against Epstein never got to court because of the permanent unavailability of the accused.
> 
> So I'm not sure that the "argument" you appear to be suggesting that Maxwell is only taking the hit because of misogyny really stands up to a moment's thought, TBH.


I'm not so much getting in on the point you are debating, but it seems to me more an issue about elite membership than gender per se.  Maxwell remained a member of the 'elite' for much of the period since her pater slid off  the side of his yacht, but there's been a kind of downward mobility. After he died there were no more jobs to be had in his companies, so she became (shudder) a 'socialite'.  After that she became a mixture of socialite and pimp for epstein.  Initially that was a further downward move, given his financial crimes, even more so when his rapey ways became known. She's where she is now because she ran out of money and friends - well and because she was a multiple trafficker and abuser (and of course the efforts of victims such as Giuffre). 

When it comes to the men, by definition they had power and influence, that seems to have been why epstein nurtured them.  Dershovitz is 83 now and might last a few more years given his access to the best health money can buy.  Lets just say when he does snuff it, you'd expect more to come out.  As we know, he'll throw the kitchen sink at anyone who tries to take him on.  He's most certainly still got his power.  The Unsweatable is in a weird position in this kind of thinking.  When Giuffre first went after him, he looked to have sufficient financial, cultural and political protection to avoid all attacks.  But somehow, by his stupidity and arrogance, he seems to have slewed of some of those protections to the point where he's virtually on his own.  He's at best a semi detached member of the royal family now and not many politicians are going to step in publicly to support him, though his mother is no doubt ready to  pull any remaining frayed strings.  Seems like there's almost a time lag in play too.  The Met have refused to investigate his rapiness several times, largely because, I imagine, they were shitting themselves at the very thought of it.  I'm not convinced they'd do much if they were asked now, but I have a suspicion they'd feel less constained now he's become persona non-grata.  Anyway, if there's a point to all this, it's that windsor and maxwell are not only where they are because of their rapiness, it's because of their reckless stupidity in not noticing they'd wandered outside the usual protections of their class.


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 1, 2022)

weltweit said:


> Anyone have any sympathy with the idea Maxwell might have also been a bit of a victim. Her youth can't have been very normal with her dad, then she found this guy Epstein, who was also bad news but she stayed with him, why? Not to forgive what she did, but just to suggest she might have been damaged goods also.


Absolutely not. And quite frankly, you should be ashamed of making such a suggestion.


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 1, 2022)

Wilf said:


> I'm not so much getting in on the point you are debating, but it seems to me more an issue about elite membership than gender per se.  Maxwell remained a member of the 'elite' for much of the period since her pater slid off  the side of his yacht, but there's been a kind of downward mobility. After he died there were no more jobs to be had in his companies, so she became (shudder) a 'socialite'.  After that she became a mixture of socialite and pimp for epstein.  Initially that was a further downward move, given his financial crimes, even more so when his rapey ways became known. She's where she is now because she ran out of money and friends - well and because she was a multiple trafficker and abuser (and of course the efforts of victims such as Giuffre).
> 
> When it comes to the men, by definition they had power and influence, that seems to have been why epstein nurtured them.  Dershovitz is 83 now and might last a few more years given his access to the best health money can buy.  Lets just say when he does snuff it, you'd expect more to come out.  As we know, he'll throw the kitchen sink at anyone who tries to take him on.  He's most certainly still got his power.  The Unsweatable is in a weird position in this kind of thinking.  When Giuffre first went after him, he looked to have sufficient financial, cultural and political protection to avoid all attacks.  But somehow, by his stupidity and arrogance, he seems to have slewed of some of those protections to the point where he's virtually on his own.  He's at best a semi detached member of the royal family now and not many politicians are going to step in publicly to support him, though his mother is no doubt ready to  pull any remaining frayed strings.  Seems like there's almost a time lag in play too.  The Met have refused to investigate his rapiness several times, largely because, I imagine, they were shitting themselves at the very thought of it.  I'm not convinced they'd do much if they were asked now, but I have a suspicion they'd feel less constained now he's become persona non-grata.  Anyway, if there's a point to all this, it's that windsor and maxwell are not only where they are because of their rapiness, it's because of their reckless stupidity in not noticing they'd wandered outside the usual protections of their class.


She didn't completely run out of friends, she managed to persuade some tech multimillionaire to marry her along the way (iirc, and I think it was his property in New Hampshire that she was arrested at).


----------



## TopCat (Jan 1, 2022)

AnnO'Neemus said:


> Once a script is written, it will often get copied into the rundowns for later bulletins.
> 
> Which means that a script written for, say, a 3pm bulletin will go out as written.
> 
> ...


A detailed but lame excuse. Any journo knew post guilty they were not accusers.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 1, 2022)

AnnO'Neemus said:


> My guess would be young freelance producer, eager to book a guest, wants to impress by booking a big name, books him at the last-ish minute without thinking things through in terms of him being an involved party, ie he's also one of the accused in the wider context of Epstein's activities.
> 
> Either that or wtf were the editor of the day and/or bulletin editor thinking.



Someone had editorial responsibility for that broadcast and that someone should be in the dole queue by now. Getting a known associate of Epstein on to smear his victims right after that verdict? If that's not deliberate apologism for nonces then it's a fuck up of such magnitude that someone needs to realise that they're in the wrong profession and they should get a job more in line with their abilities; like sitting quietly in a corner and trying not to soil themselves.


----------



## Saunders (Jan 1, 2022)

weltweit said:


> Anyone have any sympathy with the idea Maxwell might have also been a bit of a victim. Her youth can't have been very normal with her dad, then she found this guy Epstein, who was also bad news but she stayed with him, why? Not to forgive what she did, but just to suggest she might have been damaged goods also.


I don’t know that I’d say ‘sympathy’ and I most definitely wouldn’t say ‘damaged goods’ but I do think her childhood and the relationships she had will have influenced her behaviour and moral code in her adulthood. There will be reasons why she has become the person she has, and inflicted suffering on others, but they’re not excuses.


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 1, 2022)

weltweit you have a history of making what appears to be really quite stunningly naive posts on more than one occasion, but this is absolutely not the thread to suggest there should be sympathy for a sex trafficker because of their childhood is really beyond the pale.


----------



## weltweit (Jan 1, 2022)

equationgirl said:


> weltweit you have a history of making what appears to be really quite stunningly naive posts on more than one occasion, but this is absolutely not the thread to suggest there should be sympathy for a sex trafficker because of their childhood is really beyond the pale.


What rot, I asked if people had any sympathy with an idea, not with her. Anyhow it was an idea put to me on NYE and I decided to put it on here. I would dispute your accusation of my "history".


----------



## Badgers (Jan 1, 2022)




----------



## andysays (Jan 1, 2022)

equationgirl said:


> weltweit you have a history of making what appears to be really quite stunningly naive posts on more than one occasion, but this is absolutely not the thread to suggest there should be sympathy for a sex trafficker because of their childhood is really beyond the pale.


I don’t think that's what weltweit meant to suggest, but his post was unfortunately or carelessly worded and he should probably have avoided using the word "sympathy" at all because of the cleat risk of misunderstanding


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 1, 2022)

Saunders said:


> I don’t know that I’d say ‘sympathy’ and I most definitely wouldn’t say ‘damaged goods’ but I do think her childhood and the relationships she had will have influenced her behaviour and moral code in her adulthood. There will be reasons why she has become the person she has, and inflicted suffering on others, but they’re not excuses.


the main reason being that shes a piece of shit. why was saville like he was? or trump? or johnson? or nonce andrew? They all see people not as people but as things to use for thier own gratification and/or personal gain and are/were in living in strata of society where such behaviour is ,at best, tolerated and at worse actively facilitated.    fuck em and fuck em.


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 1, 2022)

weltweit said:


> What rot, I asked if people had any sympathy with an idea, not with her. Anyhow it was an idea put to me on NYE and I decided to put it on here. I would dispute your accusation of my "history".


To have sympathy for the idea does at least in part suggest sympathy for her as an individual. Those are not two completely separate things.


----------



## MickiQ (Jan 1, 2022)

Badgers said:


> View attachment 304128


If there is one group of people on this planet who must hate him with a passion that burns with the fire of a thousand suns, it will be the poor saps who work at Pizza Hut Woking. I bet they must have heard every No Sweating Joke in the world a million times by now.


----------



## weltweit (Jan 1, 2022)

equationgirl said:


> To have sympathy for the idea does at least in part suggest sympathy for her as an individual. Those are not two completely separate things.


Do normal people sexually abuse children or make children available to be abused? no they don't, in fact that is probably among the most amoral or aberrant behaviour normal people could think of.  

I have no sympathy for Maxwell, she did the crime and will have to do the time. I just wondered how twisted her morals must be? and if there is some relation with her upbringing. 

What I said was :


> Anyone have any sympathy with the idea Maxwell might have also been a bit of a victim. Her youth can't have been very normal with her dad, then she found this guy Epstein, who was also bad news but she stayed with him, why? Not to forgive what she did, but just to suggest she might have been damaged goods also.



And I made the point, "Not to forgive what she did"


----------



## weltweit (Jan 1, 2022)

equationgirl said:


> weltweit you have a history of making what appears to be really quite stunningly naive posts on more than one occasion, but this is absolutely not the thread to suggest there should be sympathy for a sex trafficker because of their childhood is really beyond the pale.


equationgirl we rarely exchange messages on these boards, where do you get the idea that I "have a history of making what appears to be really quite stunningly naive posts"?


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 1, 2022)

weltweit said:


> equationgirl we rarely exchange messages on these boards, where do you get the idea that I "have a history of making what appears to be really quite stunningly naive posts"?


Because this is not the first time that I have remarked on your apparent naiveté, not am I the only one to have done so.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 1, 2022)

weltweit said:


> Do normal people sexually abuse children or make children available to be abused? no they don't, in fact that is probably among the most amoral or aberrant behaviour normal people could think of.
> 
> I have no sympathy for Maxwell, she did the crime and will have to do the time. I just wondered how twisted her morals must be? and if there is some relation with her upbringing.
> 
> ...


its related to her position in society - wealth and power enable sociopathy. And her upbringing would have encouraged that sense of superiority and exceptionalism - and that common people are not worth considering as actual people.


----------



## weltweit (Jan 1, 2022)

equationgirl said:


> Because this is not the first time that I have remarked on your apparent naiveté, not am I the only one to have done so.


News to me, I made 73,000 posts, perhaps your laser memory could point to the offending posts?


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 1, 2022)

weltweit said:


> News to me, I made 73,000 posts, perhaps your laser memory could point to the offending posts?


As someone with memory issues that I have documented on here, that's actually really unkind.


----------



## weltweit (Jan 1, 2022)

equationgirl said:


> As someone with memory issues that I have documented on here, that's actually really unkind.


I haven't seen you commenting on your memory issues, apologies for any offence, I too have memory issues, my short term memory is appalling. Actually my memory in general is very poor.


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 1, 2022)

weltweit said:


> I haven't seen you commenting on your memory issues, apologies for any offence, I too have memory issues, my short term memory is appalling. Actually my memory in general is very poor.


Well I'm not going to mention it in every single post, am I?


----------



## Idris2002 (Jan 1, 2022)

Are we not going to talk about how Epstein and Maxwell were running a giant honeytrap operation for at least one intelligence agency?


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 1, 2022)

Idris2002 said:


> Are we not going to talk about how Epstein and Maxwell were running a giant honeytrap operation for at least one intelligence agency?


Let's.


----------



## weltweit (Jan 1, 2022)

equationgirl said:


> Well I'm not going to mention it in every single post, am I?


Indeed, but you should allow that I didn't know, and that I wasn't being "really unkind" in mentioning your memory in my earlier post. 

As to my potentially naivety, it may be, I expect I have been accused of worse.


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 1, 2022)

weltweit said:


> Indeed, but you should allow that I didn't know, and that I wasn't being "really unkind" in mentioning your memory in my earlier post.
> 
> As to my potentially naivety, it may be, I expect I have been accused of worse.


How am I supposed to know that you didn't know, ffs?


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 1, 2022)

Anyway, I'd like to discuss the honeytrap stuff.


----------



## moochedit (Jan 1, 2022)

Idris2002 said:


> Are we not going to talk about how Epstein and Maxwell were running a giant honeytrap operation for at least one intelligence agency?


Got any non-loon link for that?


----------



## seeformiles (Jan 1, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Born into unimaginable wealth. Sounds terrible.
> Although there’s definitely an argument that misogyny means she takes the hit whilst all the rich old white privileged men get away with it.



This is what fucks me off more than anything. There’s enough evidence that Epstein’s private island was wired for sight and sound and that the recordings were recovered in the FBI raid but yet Maxwell (guilty as hell) is still the patsy in a scene with far bigger players whose guilt has been pretty much ignored despite the potential evidence on those drives. It stinks of shit.


----------



## Badgers (Jan 1, 2022)

US judge delivers double setback to Prince Andrew’s abuse case battle
					

Pressure grows on duke to settle alleged victim’s claim before key hearing this week




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Wilf (Jan 1, 2022)

Everything seems to be moving against windsor now and the judge is probably rather pissed off at his lawyers. Same time the 2009 deal still looks like it could still be a significant hurdle.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 1, 2022)

The judge has said previously, “Let's cut out all the technicalities and _get to the substance_,” 

Paedo-Prince's lawyers may need a couple of ear candle sessions or summink.


----------



## MickiQ (Jan 1, 2022)

Badgers said:


> US judge delivers double setback to Prince Andrew’s abuse case battle
> 
> 
> Pressure grows on duke to settle alleged victim’s claim before key hearing this week
> ...


Judge Kaplan seems to have made his mind up that there should be a trial and nothing yet has been said that might make him change his mind, clearly he's not impressed with the "Do You Know Who I Am?" act.


----------



## Carl Steele (Jan 1, 2022)

Wilf said:


> Everything seems to be moving against windsor now and the judge is probably rather pissed off at his lawyers. Same time the 2009 deal still looks like it could still be a significant hurdle.



The duke won't be convicted of anything, there's the little matter of social class here. Epstein was a schoolteacher who made a lot of money. He was dispensable, and dispensed with. Putting away a member of the royal family is a whole different ball game. If the duke can't get away with raping teenagers, then who can? What's the world coming to?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 1, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> The duke won't be convicted of anything, there's the little matter of social class here. Epstein was a schoolteacher who made a lot of money. He was dispensable, and dispensed with. Putting away a member of the royal family is a whole different ball game. If the duke can't get away with raping teenagers, then who can? What's the world coming to?


Not sure British royalty being ruling class cuts so much ice as you think in an american court


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 1, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> The duke won't be convicted of anything, there's the little matter of social class here. Epstein was a schoolteacher who made a lot of money. He was dispensable, and dispensed with. Putting away a member of the royal family is a whole different ball game. If the duke can't get away with raping teenagers, then who can? What's the world coming to?




He's facing a civil suit.


----------



## Carl Steele (Jan 1, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> He's facing a civil suit.



ok, I didn't realise that. But I still can't see him being found guilty.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 1, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> ok, I didn't realise that. But I still can't see him being found guilty.




Sit back, relax and enjoy the show.


----------



## Carl Steele (Jan 1, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Sit back, relax and enjoy the show.



It's definitely a show, but unfortunately in Andrew's case not a show trial.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 1, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> ok, I didn't realise that. But I still can't see him being found guilty.


Why not read this very thread for a bit before you post more?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 1, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> It's definitely a show, but unfortunately in Andrew's case not a show trial.



Looks like it will be, autumn 2022, bag a space on the sofa now


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 1, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> The duke won't be convicted of anything, there's the little matter of social class here. Epstein was a schoolteacher who made a lot of money. He was dispensable, and dispensed with. Putting away a member of the royal family is a whole different ball game. If the duke can't get away with raping teenagers, then who can? What's the world coming to?


He killed himself cos he couldn’t face time. He wasn’t ‘dispensed’ with - that’s just conspirojizz nonsense


----------



## tim (Jan 1, 2022)

v


Orang Utan said:


> He killed himself cos he couldn’t face time. He wasn’t ‘dispensed’ with - that’s just conspirojizz nonsense


Yes, suicide cunningly disguised to look like murder.


----------



## Dystopiary (Jan 1, 2022)

Badgers said:


> US judge delivers double setback to Prince Andrew’s abuse case battle
> 
> 
> Pressure grows on duke to settle alleged victim’s claim before key hearing this week
> ...


Good!


----------



## 8ball (Jan 1, 2022)

tim said:


> v
> 
> Yes, suicide cunningly disguised to look like murder.



Very little cunning is ever required.


----------



## Carl Steele (Jan 1, 2022)

TopCat said:


> Why not read this very thread for a bit before you post more?



Good heavens, did I make a mistake? I'll try to do better going forward.



Pickman's model said:


> Not sure British royalty being ruling class cuts so much ice as you think in an american court



Maybe, maybe not, but in the Ghislaine trial they took great care not to implicate the great and the good.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 1, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> Good heavens, did I make a mistake? I'll try to do better going forward.



A fine choice of day for such a resolution.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 1, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> Maybe, maybe not, but in the Ghislaine trial they took great care not to implicate the great and the good.



Who took great care?


----------



## Carl Steele (Jan 1, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Who took great care?



The prosecution and defence. I followed this on the Trueanon podcast which gave daily reports from the courtroom. The conclusion they came to was that the focus was deliberately kept as narrow as possible to avoid naming names. They sum this up in the day 18 podcast, the day of the verdict.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 1, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> The prosecution and defence. I followed this on the Trueanon podcast which gave daily reports from the courtroom. The conclusion they came to was that the focus was deliberately kept as narrow as possible to avoid naming names. They sum this up in the day 18 podcast, the day of the verdict.




They were prosecuting/defending Ghislaine Maxwell.


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Jan 1, 2022)

TopCat said:


> A detailed but lame excuse. Any journo knew post guilty they were not accusers.


If you re-read what I said, you'll note I didn't actually disagree that post guilty verdict the accusers effectively became victims/survivors, so you seem to be putting words in my mouth and disagreeing with something I haven't said, a position I haven't taken.

And what I said wasn't an excuse, it was an explanation as to how in the midst of a breaking and developing news story in a busy newsroom and control room and gallery a word might slip through the net, a death toll might not be updated, earlier versions of scripts get used, etc.

It was unfortunate that it wasn't updated sooner, of course, but from your rudeness and hostility to me over the issue of what seems to have been a belated amendment and/or human error on the BBC's part, which was corrected, am I to assume you're 100 per cent perfect and you never, ever make a typo at work? Never badly word something? Never forget to update something? Never accidentally overlook something? Never make a mistake?


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 1, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> The prosecution and defence. I followed this on the Trueanon podcast which gave daily reports from the courtroom. The conclusion they came to was that the focus was deliberately kept as narrow as possible to avoid naming names. They sum this up in the day 18 podcast, the day of the verdict.


I'm not listening to anything that is described as being created by unlicensed private detectives. Surely, that just means they're armchair detectives.

Also describing it as a 'non-pedophile investigation of Epstein' is inherent bias and no true investigation should start with such bias. 

So, yeah, check your source.


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 1, 2022)

AnnO'Neemus said:


> If you re-read what I said, you'll note I didn't actually disagree that post guilty verdict the accusers effectively became victims/survivors, so you seem to be putting words in my mouth and disagreeing with something I haven't said, a position I haven't taken.
> 
> And what I said wasn't an excuse, it was an explanation as to how in the midst of a breaking and developing news story in a busy newsroom and control room and gallery a word might slip through the net, a death toll might not be updated, earlier versions of scripts get used, etc.
> 
> It was unfortunate that it wasn't updated sooner, of course, but from your rudeness and hostility to me over the issue of what seems to have been a belated amendment and/or human error on the BBC's part, which was corrected, am I to assume you're 100 per cent perfect and you never, ever make a typo at work? Never badly word something? Never forget to update something? Never accidentally overlook something? Never make a mistake?


There's typos and then there's making a typo that looks like the BBC is cementing it's establishment position and funding stream.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 1, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> The prosecution and defence. I followed this on the Trueanon podcast which gave daily reports from the courtroom. The conclusion they came to was that the focus was deliberately kept as narrow as possible to avoid naming names. They sum this up in the day 18 podcast, the day of the verdict.


'_Trueanon_'? Nope, not clicking on that.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 1, 2022)

Wilf said:


> '_Trueanon_'? Nope, not clicking on that.


Actually, I can see it's described as a _parody _of Qanon, so perhaps not what I was thinking.  Not a great choice of title though.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 1, 2022)

tim said:


> v
> 
> Yes, suicide cunningly disguised to look like murder.


He hanged himself.


----------



## Carl Steele (Jan 1, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> They were prosecuting/defending Ghislaine Maxwell.



Yes they were. What's your point?


----------



## Carl Steele (Jan 1, 2022)

equationgirl said:


> So, yeah, check your source.



Thanks, I'll be sure to get on to that right away.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 1, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> Yes they were. What's your point?




When you are prosecuting/defending person A, why would you concern yourself with defending person B, as you claimed?


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Jan 1, 2022)

SpookyFrank said:


> Someone had editorial responsibility for that broadcast and that someone should be in the dole queue by now. Getting a known associate of Epstein on to smear his victims right after that verdict? If that's not deliberate apologism for nonces then it's a fuck up of such magnitude that someone needs to realise that they're in the wrong profession and they should get a job more in line with their abilities; like sitting quietly in a corner and trying not to soil themselves.


It seems like you're arguing with me as if I defended what they did?!?!?

I simply responded to your previous post:

"BBC looking into how the Dershowitz interview happened. Real head scratcher that one."

I hazarded a guess how it happened. I didn't agree with or defend what happened, I ventured a guess as to how it happened. 

Nowhere did I defend the decision to book him as a guest. I also think it was an appalling misjudgement, terrible editorial judgement. 

Booking him as a guest was indefensible and nowhere did I approve or agree or defend the decision to do so.

Whoever did have overall editorial responsibility for that programme needs reprimanding at the very least.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 1, 2022)

equationgirl said:


> There's typos and then there's making a typo that looks like the BBC is cementing it's establishment position and funding stream.



This is why I never buy the 'honest mistake' angle. The BBC's mistakes have a distinct directionality to them. They've never slipped and edited footage to make Johnson seem _more_ drunk, for example.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 1, 2022)

AnnO'Neemus said:


> It seems like you're arguing with me as if I defended what they did?!?!?
> 
> I simply responded to your previous post:
> 
> ...



Wasn't having a go at you at all, apologies.

Your scenario is entriely plausible and seems to be based on more knowledge of the trade than I have. But like you say, someone would have had ultimate responsibility for the content of that broadcast.


----------



## Duncan2 (Jan 1, 2022)

Confidentiality agreements notwithstanding it must surely be inconceivable that Andrew's lawyers could settle this case?Someone upthread (can't find it now) said something about if the numbers were right....It boggles the mind to think what the right numbers could be.


----------



## Carl Steele (Jan 1, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> When you are prosecuting/defending person A, why would you concern yourself with defending person B, as you claimed?



I didn't claim this. Some of the witnesses in the trial were very close to Epstein and could easily have named others who were involved with him, but oddly no names came up. There were detailed descriptions of some Epstein's properties but no description of the people who visited them.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 1, 2022)

Duncan2 said:


> Confidentiality agreements notwithstanding it must surely be inconceivable that Andrew's lawyers could settle this case?Someone upthread (can't find it now) said something about if the numbers were right....It boggles the mind to think what the right numbers could be.


Presume it's the same as in the UK but if you bring a case and lose you'll be liable for other person's costs which can be 10s of thousands with lawyers as they do who run up costs.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 1, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> When you are prosecuting/defending person A, why would you concern yourself with defending person B, as you claimed?



I believe the young folk call this "flexing".


----------



## Wilf (Jan 1, 2022)

On the nonce being called out about not sweating and the pizza express alibi: I remember seeing this in the interview and thinking that whilst both seemed 'unlikely', they must be things he could get someone to back up or else he wouldn't have said them. There were rumours that 'the palace' and maybe some of his own advisers had warned against the interview.  Even with that in mind it just seemed common sense that he wouldn't have put those 2 definite claims and pieces of evidence forward if they were going to crumble when challenged.  You'd have thought he'd at least have a bent doctor and royal protection officers lined up to back his nonsense (nonce sense, naturally). 

Did we ever get the final word on his interview preparation?  Were the pizza express and non-sweat lies ever 'signed off' by a lawyer or one of his team?  If not, the startling conclusion is that he was flying solo and, with all those professional liars available, he just decided to fashion his _own _lies?    Well, that went well..


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 1, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> Thanks, I'll be sure to get on to that right away.


You've clearly not been on urban very long, but on this website you are expected to apply some critical thinking and yourself if a source you propose is a truly independent piece of research or merely the ramblings of the biased. 

This site does not tolerate shit sources or batshittery on any subject. You have been warned.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 1, 2022)

equationgirl said:


> This site does not tolerate shit sources or batshittery on any subject.



Except for cycling, veganism and Cardiff City FC.

For more information please read the FAQs or re-read this post.


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 1, 2022)

8ball said:


> Except for cycling, veganism and Cardiff FC.
> 
> For more information please read FAQs.


Oooh bold statement.


----------



## Carl Steele (Jan 1, 2022)

equationgirl said:


> You've clearly not been on urban very long, but on this website you are expected to apply some critical thinking and yourself if a source you propose is a truly independent piece of research or merely the ramblings of the biased.
> 
> This site does not tolerate shit sources or batshittery on any subject. You have been warned.



Thanks again, in the future I'll stick to the Guardian.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 1, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> Good heavens, did I make a mistake? I'll try to do better going forward.


It only takes a small amount of reading to discover it's a civil matter and not a criminal one. At least get the basics before waxing lyrical.


----------



## Duncan2 (Jan 1, 2022)

Wilf said:


> On the nonce being called out about not sweating and the pizza express alibi: I remember seeing this in the interview and thinking that whilst both seemed 'unlikely', they must be things he could get someone to back up or else he wouldn't have said them. There were rumours that 'the palace' and maybe some of his own advisers had warned against the interview.  Even with that in mind it just seemed common sense that he wouldn't have put those 2 definite claims and pieces of evidence forward if they were going to crumble when challenged.  You'd have thought he'd at least have a bent doctor and royal protection officers lined up to back his nonsense (nonce sense, naturally).
> 
> Did we ever get the final word on his interview preparation?  Were the pizza express and non-sweat lies ever 'signed off' by a lawyer or one of his team?  If not, the startling conclusion is that he was flying solo and, with all those professional liars available, he just decided to fashion his _own _lies?    Well, that went well..


It was reported that after the interview he took Maitlis on a tour of the Palace.Recall thinking at the time that he clearly had little idea of the depth of the shit he was in.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 1, 2022)

Orang Utan said:


> He hanged himself.



Well, he died by hanging.


----------



## Carl Steele (Jan 1, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> It only takes a small amount of reading to discover it's a civil matter and not a criminal one. At least get the basics before waxing lyrical.



Were you ever a schoolteacher?


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 1, 2022)

Duncan2 said:


> It was reported that after the interview he took Maitlis on a tour of the Palace


🤣 I hadn’t heard that, but that sounds about right. Clearly he was thinking “nailed it” all the way round. What a fucking arrogant fucking entitled fucking dimwit.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 1, 2022)

8ball said:


> Except for cycling, veganism and Cardiff City FC.
> 
> For more information please read the FAQs or re-read this post.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 1, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> Were you ever a schoolteacher?


Nah, lowly skilled manual labour. But I can read.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 1, 2022)

SpookyFrank said:


> Well, he died by hanging.


dunno why even sensible people like yourself seem to subscribe to this conspiracy theory. surely occam's razor applies here?


----------



## Carl Steele (Jan 1, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Nah, lowly skilled manual labour. But I can read.


I think you missed your vocation.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 1, 2022)

Orang Utan said:


> dunno why even sensible people like yourself seem to subscribe to this conspiracy theory. surely occam's razor applies here?



Which conditions determine whether or not Occam’s razor applies?


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 1, 2022)

Orang Utan said:


> dunno why even sensible people like yourself seem to subscribe to this conspiracy theory. surely occam's razor applies here?


If Epstein was murdered then it follows that Maxwell would have been similarly dispensed with. That she wasn't puts paid to that particular theory I think.


----------



## Kevbad the Bad (Jan 1, 2022)

Orang Utan said:


> dunno why even sensible people like yourself seem to subscribe to this conspiracy theory. surely occam's razor applies here?


if he'd had a razor, he might have cut the rope at the last minute. So no razor, no matter who it belonged to.


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Jan 1, 2022)

equationgirl said:


> There's typos and then there's making a typo that looks like the BBC is cementing it's establishment position and funding stream.


If it's down to a cock-up or a conspiracy theory, I was explaining how a cock-up is more likely, in that's it's much more likely that someone simply failed to pick up on the urgent need to change one word and update a script/article. If a script had been read before, if an article had been printed previously, or bits of an earlier script or article rehashed, it could've easily slipped through the net. 

But what would I know? I mean, I've only done producer shifts for BBC television and radio news output, I've only worked as a copy editor/writer, assistant producer, producer and senior journalist in other television and radio newsrooms and live studios, and online and print operations.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 1, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> If Epstein was murdered then it follows that Maxwell would have been similarly dispensed with. That she wasn't puts paid to that particular theory I think.



No, really doesn’t.
Pertains only to potential motive.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 1, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> I think you missed your vocation.


Every man and his dog knows it's a civil suit. It's been mentioned enough on this very thread and in the press. Have you been living under a rock?


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 1, 2022)

8ball said:


> No, really doesn’t.


Well lots of people were in on it then. Who gave the order?


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 1, 2022)

8ball said:


> Which conditions determine whether or not Occam’s razor applies?


i dunno.
but surely it's so much more likely that a man facing decades in prison for crimes that would entail his solitary confinement until he died of natural causes, would rationally take his own life? West and Shipman did the same.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 1, 2022)

Orang Utan said:


> surely occam's razor applies here?



I don't know what happened to Epstein. Don't think it really matters at this point. What I do care about is the misuse of 'occam's razor' which pertains to scientific theories, not specific events.


----------



## moochedit (Jan 1, 2022)

Wilf said:


> '_Trueanon_'? Nope, not clicking on that.


Was just thinking the same!


----------



## Carl Steele (Jan 1, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Every man and his dog knows it's a civil suit. It's been mentioned enough on this very thread and in the press. Have you been living under a rock?


Please, just keep punishing me, until I beg for mercy. There are lots of things going on that I'm not following particularly closely. Maybe that's also true of you.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 1, 2022)

If powerful people wanted Epstein's silence then it could have been achieved far easier prior to him being incarcerated and under guard.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 1, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> If Epstein was murdered then it follows that Maxwell would have been similarly dispensed with. That she wasn't puts paid to that particular theory I think.



That doesn't follow at all.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 1, 2022)

SpookyFrank said:


> That doesn't follow at all.


Why not? If the reason was the fear he'd name names then surely the same applies?


----------



## Iona56 (Jan 1, 2022)

There is a desperate part off me that wants to see prince Andrew pay.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 1, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Why not? If the reason was the fear he'd name names then surely the same applies?



We should be wary of assuming the motives of killers who we're assuming don't exist.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 1, 2022)

SpookyFrank said:


> We should be wary of assuming the motives of killers who we're assuming don't exist.


Maybe they were trying to kill him and the pesky justice system got in the way? But fortunately they were mates with one of the guards. 
I dunno. It's your bloody theory. Set out your stall.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 1, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Well lots of people were in on it then. Who gave the order?



Nope, doesn’t mean that at all.


----------



## BigMoaner (Jan 1, 2022)

this new NYT article put most of the idea that he was murdered to bed for me, not that i even entertained it beyond being a possibility









						Epstein’s Final Days: Celebrity Reminiscing and a Running Toilet
					

Newly released records show the disgraced financier living a mundane existence in jail before his suicide, while also spinning deceptions until the very end.




					www.nytimes.com


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 1, 2022)

8ball said:


> Nope, doesn’t mean that at all.


Well give us something then. A 'theory' usually has some kind of narrative.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 1, 2022)

Orang Utan said:


> i dunno.
> but surely it's so much more likely that a man facing decades in prison for crimes that would entail his solitary confinement until he died of natural causes, would rationally take his own life? West and Shipman did the same.



Much more likely than what?  You haven’t even provided a complete sentence.


----------



## Iona56 (Jan 1, 2022)

Sugar Kane said:


> 1. Andrew will not last the year
> 2. Queen will not last the year.
> 3. Charles will not last the year.
> 4. William will take it on but turn it into something like the Danish monarchy... a symbolic figurehead.
> ...


Had to read that a few times, but can't really disagree


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 1, 2022)

8ball said:


> You haven’t even provided a complete sentence.



Neither did Epstein.


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 1, 2022)

AnnO'Neemus said:


> If it's down to a cock-up or a conspiracy theory, I was explaining how a cock-up is more likely, in that's it's much more likely that someone simply failed to pick up on the urgent need to change one word and update a script/article. If a script had been read before, if an article had been printed previously, or bits of an earlier script or article rehashed, it could've easily slipped through the net.
> 
> But what would I know? I mean, I've only done producer shifts for BBC television and radio news output, I've only worked as a copy editor/writer, assistant producer, producer and senior journalist in other television and radio newsrooms and live studios, and online and print operations.


People are not attacking you, they are disagreeing with you.

No-one is disputing your working experiences, but looking at the bigger overall direction of the BBC as an organisation.


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 1, 2022)

Iona56 said:


> There is a desperate part off me that wants to see prince Andrew pay.


Welcome!


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 1, 2022)

Sugar Kane said:


> 1. Andrew will not last the year
> 2. Queen will not last the year.
> 3. Charles will not last the year.
> 4. William will take it on but turn it into something like the Danish monarchy... a symbolic figurehead.
> ...



My money's still on Meghan game of thronesing the lot of them and installing what's his name, Archie as king with herself as regent.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 1, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Well give us something then. A 'theory' usually has some kind of narrative.



I was just pointing out the failures of basic thinking in your argument.

Here it is again:

“If Epstein was murdered then it follows that Maxwell would have been similarly dispensed with.”

No.  It doesn’t necessarily follow.  You need to fill in a lot of details until it follows.  I’m not responding with an alternative theory, just pointing out a failure of stated logic based on unstated assumptions.


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 1, 2022)

moochedit said:


> Was just thinking the same!


SoundCloud wanted me to accept cookies. I think not. And no way am I clicking on 'trueanon'.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 1, 2022)

8ball said:


> I was just pointing out the failures of basic thinking in your argument.
> 
> Here it is again:
> 
> ...


It's a fair point. But it's kind of difficult to pick holes in a theory that is a sentence long: he was murdered. With absolutely zero meat on the bones.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 1, 2022)

8ball said:


> Much more likely than what?  You haven’t even provided a complete sentence.


 No, it was he who didn’t provide the complete sentence, whereas I did


----------



## Iona56 (Jan 1, 2022)

I'm not very royal "acquainted" but I am very "if you did the dirty deed" pay up and be


equationgirl said:


> Welcome!



accountable


----------



## Carl Steele (Jan 1, 2022)

equationgirl said:


> SoundCloud wanted me to accept cookies. I think not. And no way am I clicking on 'trueanon'.


The name is a joke. And you are condemning something you haven't even listened to. Not for one second. Perhaps you are too busy reading the Guardian.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 1, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> It's a fair point. But it's kind of difficult to pick holes in a theory that is a sentence long: he was murdered. With absolutely zero meat on the bones.



I’m not saying he was murdered.  

I’m saying that to conclude suicide is the explanation is to impute a quantity of unknown variables not significantly different in number to the number of added variables necessary to conclude that he was murdered.

Suicide is a more elegant and parsimonious  explanation on the surface of things, but it’s a complex matter of interactions between people and groups with much more power than us ordinary schmoes.

Also, rich sociopaths kill each other now and then.  So long as they limit the collateral damage I reserve few fucks for them.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 1, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> That she wasn't puts paid to that particular theory I think.


Especially as she did a runner, but hardly executed a Harry Roberts-style _disappear off the grid_ number like Raoul Moat.

Instead she chose to live in secluded comfort on a $1 million estate bought for cash through a private limited company, in regular contact with her husband, the Maxwell family and her lawyers.

Whilst posing investigative and evidentiary problems to a law enforcement agency, it would surely not represent much of a difficulty to a shadowy Parallax or Illuminatus or whatever.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 1, 2022)

So yeah, he probably killed himself


----------



## Carl Steele (Jan 1, 2022)

Orang Utan said:


> So yeah, he probably killed himself


Hung himself while on suicide watch. Now that must be the explanation.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 1, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> Hung himself while on suicide watch. Now that must be the explanation.


Hanged, not hung.
Yes, that’s the likely and probable explanation. 
Doesn’t take long.


----------



## Duncan2 (Jan 1, 2022)

I wonder what the statistics show about the safety or lack thereof from assault murderous or otherwise of incarcerated individuals as compared with that of the general population?Doubtless the lack of reliable witnesses inside would pose a problem for the statisticians🙂


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 1, 2022)

8ball said:


> I’m not saying he was murdered.
> 
> I’m saying that to conclude suicide is the explanation is to impute a quantity of unknown variables not significantly different in number to the number of added variables necessary to conclude that he was murdered.
> 
> ...


This would read better if written in plain English


----------



## Johnny Vodka (Jan 1, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> If Epstein was murdered then it follows that Maxwell would have been similarly dispensed with. That she wasn't puts paid to that particular theory I think.



Give it a few months.

'Epstein didn't kill himself' is one of the most likely true conspiracy theories IMO.


----------



## Carl Steele (Jan 1, 2022)

Orang Utan said:


> Hanged, not hung.
> Yes, that’s the likely and probable explanation.
> Doesn’t take long.


From the Miriam-Webster dictionary - "The past tense of hang, in almost all situations is *hung*."

Epstein was left in his cell alone that night, although the regulations said he should not have been alone. The AG was Mr. Bill Barr, who declared it was a suicide. You can believe this psycho if you like, and maybe he was telling the truth this time.


----------



## fishfinger (Jan 1, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> From the Miriam-Webster dictionary - "The past tense of hang, in almost all situations is *hung*."


From Miriam-Webster:



> Use _hanged_ when referring to a person being suspended by a rope around the neck until dead.



Is it 'Hung' or 'Hanged'?


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 1, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> From the Miriam-Webster dictionary - "The past tense of hang, in almost all situations is *hung*."


Sorry but .. if you're talking about death by hanging, the past tense is _hanged_.
FtR, I think Epstein was done in, to avoid any chance of a plea-bargain (which he was the type to have taken IMO)
By whom? No idea, but his phone book was a veritable who's who of the mega-rich and powerful. Don't fuck with those people, I guess.


----------



## Flavour (Jan 1, 2022)

Spare us the pedantry, all. It's very boring.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 1, 2022)

fishfinger said:


> From Miriam-Webster:
> 
> 
> 
> Is it 'Hung' or 'Hanged'?


From that same link:



> The distinction between hanged and hung is not an especially useful one (although a few commentators claim otherwise). It is, however, a simple one and certainly easy to remember. Therein lies its popularity. If you make a point of observing the distinction in your writing, you will not thereby become a better writer, but you will spare yourself the annoyance of being corrected for having done something that is not wrong.


----------



## Carl Steele (Jan 1, 2022)

mojo pixy said:


> Sorry but .. if you're talking about death by hanging, the past tense is _hanged_.


Well, I must admit, I haven't often written or talked about death by hanging in the past tense.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 1, 2022)

Johnny Vodka said:


> Give it a few months.
> 
> 'Epstein didn't kill himself' is one of the most likely true conspiracy theories IMO.


 No, quite the opposite. It will become an example of how easily people accept fake news just cos it fits in with a barely considered internal presumption


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 1, 2022)

Flavour said:


> Spare us the pedantry, all. It's very boring.


The difference between hung and hanged is easy to learn, but since it doesn’t matter in the least I don’t care, except that it annoys people who have no good reason for being annoyed by it, so I always try to say hung when I remember.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 1, 2022)

Flavour said:


> Spare us the pedantry, all. It's very boring.


For you maybe. But it’s more interesting than this stupid deliberation over whether he killed himself or not


----------



## Kevbad the Bad (Jan 1, 2022)

Well I think he was well hanged. I don't like to think about the alternative.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 1, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> Hung himself while on suicide watch. Now that must be the explanation.


Yup. Can’t have been suicide since he was on suicide watch. He wasn’t on murder watch, so it must have been murder.


----------



## tim (Jan 1, 2022)

Orang Utan said:


> He hanged himself.


Yes, just like Roberto Calvi did.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 1, 2022)

tim said:


> Yes, just like Roberto Calvi did.


Disingenuous post. Very different circumstances. And you know it


----------



## two sheds (Jan 1, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> The difference between hung and hanged is easy to learn, but since it doesn’t matter in the least I don’t care, except that it annoys people who have no good reason for being annoyed by it, so I always try to say hung when I remember.


it's fewer


----------



## Carl Steele (Jan 1, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> Yup. Can’t have been suicide since he was on suicide watch. He wasn’t on murder watch, so it must have been murder.


There's no such thing as murder watch, though people are murdered in prison. I don't know what happened but suicide seems less plausible than murder, given the stakes.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 1, 2022)

two sheds said:


> fewer


Shh. I told you not to call me that yet.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 1, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> There's no such thing as murder watch


I was being facetious.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 1, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> There's no such thing as murder watch, though people are murdered in prison. I don't know what happened but suicide seems less plausible than murder, given the stakes.


how do you even come to that conclusion unless you are spectacularly thick? I dunno, supposedly intelligent Urban posters seem to be propogating this nonsense too. Maybe everyone has a thick-spot


----------



## Flavour (Jan 1, 2022)

There sort of is a thing called murder watch, its called the witness protection program


----------



## Carl Steele (Jan 1, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> I was being facetious.


Well done!


----------



## Wilf (Jan 1, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> The name is a joke. And you are condemning something you haven't even listened to. Not for one second. Perhaps you are too busy reading the Guardian.


I get that, but it's not the best title for a podcast, given the potential for thinking they actually are some sort of qanon twats.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 1, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> Well done!


I was being facetious with purpose.


----------



## Carl Steele (Jan 1, 2022)

Orang Utan said:


> how do you even come to that conclusion unless you are spectacularly thick? I dunno, supposedly intelligent Urban posters seem to be propogating this nonsense too. Maybe everyone has a thick-spot


It's called a difference of opinion.


----------



## fishfinger (Jan 1, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> I was being facetious with purpose.


That's an arrestable offence!


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 1, 2022)

Kevbad the Bad said:


> Well I think he was well hanged. I don't like to think about the alternative.


----------



## JimW (Jan 1, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> It's called a difference of opinion.


We have no brook with such heresies here at the monothought clique.


----------



## Duncan2 (Jan 1, 2022)

Despite a spot of googling I can't easily determine whether an inquest has taken place .Wiki suggests that only sixteen per cent of US citizens think it was suicide as opposed to forty five per cent who think it was murder.That suggests to me that Orang Utan is right about this.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 1, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> It's called a difference of opinion.


Except one opinion is based on nothing but presumption and conjecture, whilst ignoring the most plausible rational explanation that a guilty man killed himself cos he didn’t want to spend the rest of his entire life incarcerated whilst marked as a nonce and he didn’t want to face up to his own guilt


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 1, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> It's called a difference of opinion.


the officially-designated Urban75 term for this is _cunt_.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 1, 2022)

JimW said:


> We have no brook with such heresies here at the monothought clique.


Carl obviously hasn’t even been issued with the style book; the thought book is only sent out once you’ve signed that you’ve read the style book.


----------



## Carl Steele (Jan 1, 2022)

Wilf said:


> I get that, but it's not the best title for a podcast, given the potential for thinking they actually are some sort of qanon twats.


The podcast and the podcasters are well known on the American left. Listen to what they have to say if you're interested. If not, don't.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 1, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> The podcast and the podcasters are well known on the American left. Listen to what they have to say if you're interested. If not, don't.


Clear flow chart. Cheers.


----------



## tim (Jan 1, 2022)

SpookyFrank said:


> My money's still on Meghan game of thronesing the lot of them and installing what's his name, Archie as king with herself as regent.


Why all this "_Game of Thrones"_ shit? There's no need to turn to fiction, this is the kind of stuff the Plantagenets actually did.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 1, 2022)

I can see Andrew's lawyers trying a new move to have the case thrown* out on the grounds that Epstein was hung even though the contract very clearly said hanged.

* Or, possibly, "throwed".


----------



## Carl Steele (Jan 1, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> Clear flow chart. Cheers.


It's an AI algorithm, I'm trying to initiate the machine uprising. Disconnect your washing machine immediately.


----------



## Flavour (Jan 1, 2022)

The Duke does not read documents written in American English, one assumes


----------



## weltweit (Jan 1, 2022)

The niggle I have with Epstein's demise is that if he hanged himself, what did he use? People on suicide watch are not generally permitted any objects that they could use to hang themselves so for example their belts and shoe laces are taken from them. It would be an oversight at the very least to have left something he could use to hang himself in his cell. So what did he use?


----------



## fishfinger (Jan 1, 2022)

weltweit said:


> ...So what did he use?


His bed sheet.


----------



## spanglechick (Jan 1, 2022)

weltweit said:


> The niggle I have with Epstein's demise is that if he hanged himself, what did he use? People on suicide watch are not generally permitted any objects that they could use to hang themselves so for example their belts and shoe laces are taken from them. It would be an oversight at the very least to have left something he could use to hang himself in his cell. So what did he use?


Unless they keep them naked there’s the possibility of making a noose out of clothing.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 1, 2022)

Somebody buzz me when we get back to Andrew’s woes. Cheers.


----------



## Duncan2 (Jan 1, 2022)

.


----------



## Kevbad the Bad (Jan 1, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> Somebody buzz me when we get back to Andrew’s woes. Cheers.


Ok. It was Andrew supplied the rope.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 1, 2022)

Orang Utan said:


> This would read better if written in plain English



Try reading it in English - might help.


----------



## Carl Steele (Jan 2, 2022)

It does surprise me somewhat, that people here are so trusting of the state and the ruling class. A lot of people refer to themselves as anarchists, but I really feel as though I'm exchanging with social democrats. The idea that Epstein was murdered is hardly outlandish, except for those who believe in the decency of the American judicial/political/social system.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 2, 2022)

I'm always telling them this  you're too trusting of the state and the ruling class I'm telling them.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 2, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> The podcast and the podcasters are well known on the American left. Listen to what they have to say if you're interested. If not, don't.


I'm not having a go at you, just suggesting trueanon sounds a bit like an alt-right site.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 2, 2022)

Kevbad the Bad said:


> Ok. It was Andrew supplied the rope.


... in the library.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 2, 2022)

Kevbad the Bad said:


> Ok. It was Andrew supplied the rope.


This is the thing. It is of course possible that powerful people had Epstein killed, or even caused him to kill himself. It’s also plausible that he killed himself for his own reasons. I have no intention of trying to read up on it: if it’s the former, the powerful people won’t have left clues for random bloggers. 

On balance, based on only a superficial reading, I think he probably killed himself.  If it emerges that he didn’t, I won’t be particularly surprised, but it’s not something I think I need to build up any expertise on. Even if I could.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 2, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> The idea that Epstein was murdered is hardly outlandish, except for those who believe in the decency of the American judicial/political/social system.


It’s not outlandish. But neither is it outlandish to think may have killed himself. It doesn’t follow that because you think a paedophile might have killed himself that you believe in the decency of the American judicial/political/social system.  Indeed it’s something of a failing of that very system if he was able to.


----------



## tim (Jan 2, 2022)

Orang Utan said:


> Disingenuous post. Very different circumstances. And you know it


The first inquest into Calvi's death concluded that it was suicide. There was a second inquest a year later that gave an open verdict. A second autopsy held a decade after his death declared that Calvi's injuries were inconsistent with suicide; a second autopsy on Epstein came to the same conclusion. One of the theories about Calvi was that his death was suicide made to look like murder. Calvi was in trouble facing prison and the concomitant loss of income. He was however heavily insured with a policy that would cushion his family's loss of income. Killing yourself in a way that looked like a ritualistic Masonic murder would ensure that the brokers paid out.

Hence my comment which you seemed to disagree with.



tim said:


> Yes, suicide cunningly disguised to look like murder.



Both deaths in their own way were very odd. Why should we accept that one is the consequence of a labyrinthine conspiracy and not the other?


----------



## Wilf (Jan 2, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> It does surprise me somewhat, that people here are so trusting of the state and the ruling class. A lot of people refer to themselves as anarchists, but I really feel as though I'm exchanging with social democrats. The idea that Epstein was murdered is hardly outlandish, except for those who believe in the decency of the American judicial/political/social system.


I and I suspect most people on this thread will be fully on board with the idea the American and British police routinely kill working class people people inside and outside of cells.  In terms of them killing epstein, it's more a question of why would they? Yes, some industrialists/bankers/actors and the rest would have been shitting themselves about what he might say at some stage. But that doesn't add up to the American state and/or New York authorities taking the _immense _risk of launching a conspiracy, one which if it was ever uncovered would see them facing jail time. There's also the number of people any such conspiracy would need to be on board and consequent risk of detection, the thing going wrong and the body having obvious signs of murder etc etc.  And why would the authorities go to all that trouble to save Prince Noncey, Dershovitz or at best, Clinton?  The simplest explanation, Occcam's Razor and all that.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 2, 2022)

I don't think Epstein being murdered can be definitely ruled out. But I haven't seen anything to indicate that any of the supposedly suspicious circumstances can't reasonably be called consistent with suicide.

For example, even if the apparent laxness in prison security were down to people being paid off (rather than it just being generally rubbish), surely it could easily be that it was Epstein who paid people off.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 2, 2022)

Raheem said:


> For example, even if the apparent laxness in prison security were down to people being paid off (rather than it just being generally rubbish), surely it could easily be that it was Epstein who paid people off.



Occam's razor - now multi-blade!


----------



## Serge Forward (Jan 2, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> It does surprise me somewhat, that people here are so trusting of the state and the ruling class. A lot of people refer to themselves as anarchists, but I really feel as though I'm exchanging with social democrats. The idea that Epstein was murdered is hardly outlandish, except for those who believe in the decency of the American judicial/political/social system.


I don't know 100% whether he killed himself or was murdered. I'm inclined to think suicide. If I actually gave a shit, then I'd be inclined to ask a bookie for a price on it eventually turning out he was in fact murdered. As I've got a sneaking feeling the odds for that would be astronomical, it might be worth a punt.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 2, 2022)

8ball said:


> Occam's razor - now multi-blade!


That’s the way with razors, isn’t it?


----------



## 8ball (Jan 2, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> That’s the way with razors, isn’t it?



Increasingly so.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 2, 2022)

Serge Forward said:


> I don't know 100% whether he killed himself or was murdered. I'm inclined to think suicide. If I actually gave a shit, then I'd be inclined to ask a bookie for a price on it eventually turning out he was in fact murdered. As I've got a sneaking feeling the odds for that would be astronomical, it might be worth a punt.


Problem is chances he didn't kill himself ≠ chances we will one day know about it.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 2, 2022)

8ball said:


> Increasingly so.


New from Occam!


----------



## 8ball (Jan 2, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> New from Occam!
> 
> View attachment 304165



Becoming more of a cheese grater.


----------



## Serge Forward (Jan 2, 2022)

Raheem said:


> Problem is chances he didn't kill himself ≠ chances we will one day know about it.


Ok, so I'd make it a double then.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 2, 2022)

Wilf said:


> I and I suspect most people on this thread will be fully on board with the idea the American and British police routinely kill working class people people inside and outside of cells.  In terms of them killing epstein, it's more a question of why would they? Yes, some industrialists/bankers/actors and the rest would have been shitting themselves about what he might say at some stage. But that doesn't add up to the American state and/or New York authorities taking the _immense _risk of launching a conspiracy, one which if it was ever uncovered would see them facing jail time. There's also the number of people any such conspiracy would need to be on board and consequent risk of detection, the thing going wrong and the body having obvious signs of murder etc etc.  And why would the authorities go to all that trouble to save Prince Noncey, Dershovitz or at best, Clinton?  The simplest explanation, Occcam's Razor and all that.


----------



## JimW (Jan 2, 2022)

What about if it was a sex game gone wrong, eh? We know he was a dirty fucker.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 2, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> It does surprise me somewhat, that people here are so trusting of the state and the ruling class. A lot of people refer to themselves as anarchists, but I really feel as though I'm exchanging with social democrats.


Not sure that anarchists leap to wild claims if there's a possibility it might involve a state. Fascists are more likely to or green party loons.


----------



## Serge Forward (Jan 2, 2022)

Aye, just because we're anti state doesn't mean we're anti reason as well.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 2, 2022)

Orang Utan said:


>




You were probably expecting a comment on the subject matter or your clever choice of content etc. etc.

but FUCK ME!!!  THEY ARE SO YOUNG!!!! WERE WE EVER THAT YOUNG????!!?!?!?


----------



## Sue (Jan 2, 2022)

Serge Forward said:


> Aye, just because we're anti state doesn't mean we're anti reason as well.


Speak for yourself .


----------



## discokermit (Jan 2, 2022)

if it isnt hung, how come its hung, drawn and quartered eh? smart cunts?


----------



## 8ball (Jan 2, 2022)

Orang Utan said:


>




And also.  Hands up who can imagine the BBC putting out anything even a billion miles from that out now?


----------



## fishfinger (Jan 2, 2022)

discokermit said:


> if it isnt hung, how come its hung, drawn and quartered eh? smart cunts?


Do you mean Hanged, drawn and quartered - Wikipedia?


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 2, 2022)

discokermit said:


> if it isnt hung, how come its hung, drawn and quartered eh? smart cunts?


Because they're not talking in the past tense.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 2, 2022)

Note to all:
When devising a conspiracy theory, word it tightly enough to get it past the pedants else it may not gain traction.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 2, 2022)

discokermit said:


> if it isnt hung, how come its hung, drawn and quartered eh? smart cunts?


A lot of people say it the wrong way, but it's actually "Hanged, drawed and 75% off".


----------



## 1927 (Jan 2, 2022)

discokermit said:


> if it isnt hung, how come its hung, drawn and quartered eh? smart cunts?


It isn't, its hanged, drawn and quartered!


----------



## fishfinger (Jan 2, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Note to all:
> When devising a conspiracy theory, word it tightly enough to get it past the pedants else it may not gain traction.


Jet fuel can't melt paedophiles!


----------



## 8ball (Jan 2, 2022)

fishfinger said:


> Do you mean Hanged, drawn and quartered - Wikipedia?



Fuck's sake, don't get him started.
Got enough embittered Trotskyist piano teachers round here to do a fucking Philip Glass conference.


----------



## discokermit (Jan 2, 2022)

like the motto "just say ung, yow cor goo rung".


----------



## Weller (Jan 2, 2022)

Ive come back to catch up on this thread without me reading all the last few pages has the Royal Nonceness hanged himself or something


----------



## Raheem (Jan 2, 2022)

discokermit said:


> like the motto "just say ung, yow cor goo rung".


"Jus say anged, cus sayin ung is band".


----------



## Raheem (Jan 2, 2022)

Weller said:


> Ive come back to catch up on this thread without me reading all the last few pages has the Royal Nonceness hanged himself or something


Hung, FFS!


----------



## 8ball (Jan 2, 2022)

Raheem said:


> Hung, FFS!



Indeed.

And it turns out that due to a traumatic origin story event in the Falklands he has been rendered completely immune to asphyxiation.


----------



## Weller (Jan 2, 2022)

​8ball said
_ "And it turns out that due to a traumatic origin story event in the Falklands he has been rendered completely immune to asphyxiation"_


Lack of sleep worrying about the court case going ahead and drowned himself in his own bed of sweat now we know he sweats was the headline I was hoping  for not a hunging


----------



## 8ball (Jan 2, 2022)

Weller said:


> 8ball said
> _ "And it turns out that due to a traumatic origin story event in the Falklands he has been rendered completely immune to asphyxiation"_
> 
> 
> Lack of sleep worrying about the court case going ahead and drowned himself in his own bed of sweat now we know he sweats was the headline I was hoping  for not a hunging



I think the term "hunging" is guaranteed to totally outrage everyone on the thread.


----------



## Weller (Jan 2, 2022)

To get it back on track then


----------



## Raheem (Jan 2, 2022)

Weller said:


> View attachment 304166


"I'm so glad you used the gerund, Andrew, or we might have ended up with a difference of opinion."


----------



## 8ball (Jan 2, 2022)

Weller said:


> To get it back on track then
> 
> View attachment 304166



Hunging


----------



## Iona56 (Jan 2, 2022)

SpookyFrank said:


> My money's still on Meghan game of thronesing the lot of them and installing what's his name, Archie as king with herself as regent.





SpookyFrank said:


> My money's still on Meghan game of thronesing the lot of them and installing what's his name, Archie as king with herself as regent.


In a way it IS game of thrones, except the end is as unsatisfactory was as Daenerys being as looper as the rest of them and taking it out on everyone. If the book is that bad I will just give up, ours taken him years to write it and we've got to the point where the tv show has out run the book which is never good news!


----------



## Calamity1971 (Jan 2, 2022)

AnnO'Neemus said:


> Once a script is written, it will often get copied into the rundowns for later bulletins.


The script should've been written as victims. It was well long after the cunt was found guilty. It's more evidence that the BBC is guilty of bias. If I was a news reader I would have questioned ' accusers'.


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 2, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> The name is a joke. And you are condemning something you haven't even listened to. Not for one second. Perhaps you are too busy reading the Guardian.


Yes, I got the pun, thank you for mansplaining it though.


Carl Steele said:


> It does surprise me somewhat, that people here are so trusting of the state and the ruling class. A lot of people refer to themselves as anarchists, but I really feel as though I'm exchanging with social democrats. The idea that Epstein was murdered is hardly outlandish, except for those who believe in the decency of the American judicial/political/social system.


I'm surprised you think that given the general tone of the site and politely suggest you do some more reading. Else you're being a troll.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 2, 2022)

Calamity1971 said:


> The script should've been written as victims. It was well long after the cunt was found guilty. It's more evidence that the BBC is guilty of bias. If I was a news reader I would have questioned ' accusers'.




They could have gone with victims/survivors all the way through, on account of them being victims/survivors of Epstein and the trial being whether Maxwell was his accomplice.


----------



## Yossarian (Jan 2, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> They could have gone with victims/survivors all the way through, on account of them being victims/survivors of Epstein and the trial being whether Maxwell was his accomplice.



The language surrounding these cases definitely needs an overhaul - I don't think the US media could have referred to the victims as victims before the verdict because of libel laws and the fact that lawyers could argue that prejudicial media coverage meant their client didn't get a fair trial and deserves an appeal, but there's got to be a better term than "accuser" or "alleged victim."


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 2, 2022)

Yossarian said:


> I don't think the US media could have referred to the victims as victims before the verdict because of libel laws and the fact that lawyers could argue that prejudicial media coverage meant their client didn't get a fair trial and deserves an appeal....



Compare that level of deference to the way the 'accusers' are spoken about. Often by the exact same lawyers who will throw their toys out the pram if anyone uses the word victim. You'd think that openly smearing witnesses and litigants would also prejudice legal proceedings but apparently not.

A function of which party usually has the most power and resources in these situations I suppose.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 2, 2022)

"For the moment, Andrew Windsor denies all, as convincingly as a gimp photographed in a gimp suit denying he’s a gimp. "








						Ghislaine Maxwell, the Demon Queen, is behind bars. Does she have a secret that could unlock her shackles?
					

Our writer sat through the trial in New York and reports on the humiliation of the mwah-mwah princess, her repeated failures to end Jeffrey Epstein’s abuse and the chances of her cutting a deal with the Feds




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## spudulike (Jan 2, 2022)

Ming said:


> What’s that term meaning ‘all are equal before the law’.…lol.


"Habeas cashus"?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 2, 2022)

SpookyFrank said:


> Compare that level of deference to the way the 'accusers' are spoken about. Often by the exact same lawyers who will throw their toys out the pram if anyone uses the word victim. You'd think that openly smearing witnesses and litigants would also prejudice legal proceedings but apparently not.
> 
> A function of which party usually has the most power and resources in these situations I suppose.



Maxwell’s lawyer named two of the victims in court who had been granted anonymity, pretended it was a slip of the tongue, yet was clearly intended to intimidate them and in the case of the actress it worked, she broke down at that point.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 2, 2022)

As I recall the cunt has form for doing stuff like that. 

Eta: and why wasn't he done for Contempt of Court


----------



## Johnny Vodka (Jan 2, 2022)

Wilf said:


> And why would the authorities go to all that trouble to save Prince Noncey, Dershovitz or at best, Clinton?  The simplest explanation, Occcam's Razor and all that.



POTUS at the time also spent time with Epstein AFAIK.  There's probably a _very_ long list of _very_ powerful men who had a lot to lose if he talked.


----------



## Ming (Jan 2, 2022)

spudulike said:


> "Habeas cashus"?


I possibly might have a nut allergy.


----------



## kenny g (Jan 2, 2022)

equationgirl said:


> How am I supposed to know that you didn't know, ffs?





equationgirl said:


> You've clearly not been on urban very long, but on this website you are expected to apply some critical thinking and yourself if a source you propose is a truly independent piece of research or merely the ramblings of the biased.
> 
> This site does not tolerate shit sources or batshittery on any subject. You have been warned.


I think you need to take a breath. Your interactions are becoming increasingly self important and borderline rude... I don't want to put you on ignore because you occasionally contribute something worthwhile here but the above tussles suggest something is going wrong...


----------



## kenny g (Jan 2, 2022)

SpookyFrank said:


> I don't know what happened to Epstein. Don't think it really matters at this point. What I do care about is the misuse of 'occam's razor' which pertains to scientific theories, not specific events.


When investigating an event it is a useful tool though. Not sure how you would argue against its use other than scientifically..


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 2, 2022)

kenny g said:


> I think you need to take a breath. Your interactions are becoming increasingly self important and borderline rude... I don't want to put you on ignore because you occasionally contribute something worthwhile here but the above tussles suggest something is going wrong...


Noted.


----------



## Idris2002 (Jan 2, 2022)

equationgirl said:


> Anyway, I'd like to discuss the honeytrap stuff.





moochedit said:


> Got any non-loon link for that?


This is a relatively level-headed thing that scratches the surface of the alleged spook links:









						Was Jeffrey Epstein a Spy?
					

The notorious financier pedophile told exaggerated stories of his time in intelligence circles — but some of those stories may have been, at least partially, true




					www.rollingstone.com
				




The reporting of the Miami Herald people, which broke the story years ago, included one claim that a prosecutor (or investigator?) had been warned off by a Fed who told him "Epstein belongs to intelligence".


----------



## teqniq (Jan 2, 2022)

The Motherjones piece linked to upthread touches on the spooks stuff too but not in great detail.


----------



## RileyOBlimey (Jan 2, 2022)

The Sweeney podcast is worth a listen: Hunting Ghislaine: A new LBC podcast investigating the life of Ghislaine Maxwell


----------



## quiet guy (Jan 2, 2022)

JimW said:


> What about if it was a sex game gone wrong, eh? We know he was a dirty fucker.


There was no citrus fruit found


----------



## quiet guy (Jan 2, 2022)




----------



## weltweit (Jan 2, 2022)

fishfinger said:


> His bed sheet.


indeed 









						Death of Jeffrey Epstein - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## splonkydoo (Jan 2, 2022)

Idris2002 said:


> This is a relatively level-headed thing that scratches the surface of the alleged spook links:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



If he ever was working for them or not, we will surely never know for certain, or at least not for a very long time.


----------



## LDC (Jan 2, 2022)

it wouldn't be a massive surprise if he passed bits of info to various government and intelligence agencies given his life and contacts (and his ego and narcissism) as thousands of people do, but that's _very_ different to 'working for them' on some kind of more serious basis.


----------



## Carl Steele (Jan 2, 2022)

He hung, sorry hanged, himself, with a strip of bedsheet, from the lower bunk? How does a man who's 6 feet tall do this?  He didn't have a cellmate (which he was required to have) and three cameras malfunctioned at the same time, and he was supposed to be looked in on every 30 minutes but wasn't. Leaving aside the availability of other materials which were more suitable for self-hanging than a bedsheet, and the argument over the damage to his neck, how does the suicide claim make any sense?


----------



## LDC (Jan 2, 2022)

It's reasonably common to hang yourself from something low. It doesn't need your body to be free hanging, just that your slumped body brings enough weight on your neck. You tie it tight round your neck and a fixed point and slump down and if done right (and you don't panic/backtrack) you quickly lose consciousness, and then once that happens the lack of blood and oxygen to your head does the rest.

I have no idea (and don't care) if it was suicide or murder, but people saying it must be murder as hanging in those circumstances is impossible are wrong.


----------



## seeformiles (Jan 2, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> He hung, sorry hanged, himself, with a strip of bedsheet, from the lower bunk? How does a man who's 6 feet tall do this?  He didn't have a cellmate (which he was required to have) and three cameras malfunctioned at the same time, and he was supposed to be looked in on every 30 minutes but wasn't. Leaving aside the availability of other materials which were more suitable for self-hanging than a bedsheet, and the argument over the damage to his neck, how does the suicide claim make any sense?



The Mother Jones article points out features of his “suicide” that pointed more towards strangulation - stuff about the mark on his neck and bones broken that wouldn’t be consistent with suicide via a bedsheet noose. Also details that there was broken skin in the neck wound and no blood on the bed sheet. It’s probably grassy knoll territory but there it is anyway.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 2, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> He hung, sorry hanged, himself, with a strip of bedsheet, from the lower bunk? How does a man who's 6 feet tall do this?  He didn't have a cellmate (which he was required to have) and three cameras malfunctioned at the same time, and he was supposed to be looked in on every 30 minutes but wasn't. Leaving aside the availability of other materials which were more suitable for self-hanging than a bedsheet, and the argument over the damage to his neck, how does the suicide claim make any sense?


It makes total sense. People have hanged themselves from towel rails on the back of doors. Height is irrelevant. 
Why would anyone else bother killing him anyway?


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 2, 2022)

Orang Utan said:


> <snip>
> Why would anyone else bother killing him anyway?


Er... he had a lot of kompromat on a lot of powerful people... 

Btw, what's happened to that, and is it all in one place, destroyed, or disseminated widely among lesser kompromat holders?


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 2, 2022)

And presumably the guards being asleep was a stroke of good fortune? Unless they had been drugged. But then surely they'd have kicked up a fuss about it instead of falsifying records.


----------



## Carl Steele (Jan 2, 2022)

Orang Utan said:


> It makes total sense. People have hanged themselves from towel rails on the back of doors. Height is irrelevant.
> Why would anyone else bother killing him anyway?


The thing that interests me here is not so much did Epstein kill himself or not, and it seems to me unlikely that he did, but still possible, but I wonder why some people are so invested in the idea that he wasn't murdered, when the evidence is at best unclear.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 2, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> The thing that interests me here is not so much did Epstein kill himself or not, and it seems to me unlikely that he did, but still possible, but I wonder why some people are so invested in the idea that he wasn't murdered, when the evidence is at best unclear.


Because murdering someone in a secure facility without any witnesses might be somewhat tricky? How did they get the key/s for his cell?


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 2, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> And presumably the guards being asleep was a stroke of good fortune? Unless they had been drugged. But then surely they'd have kicked up a fuss about it instead of falsifying records.


Whether suicide or murder (!) there are probably some guards somewhere with a larger than average pension. He could easily have paid people to look the other way.


----------



## Carl Steele (Jan 2, 2022)

Orang Utan said:


> People have hanged themselves from towel rails on the back of doors.


Do you have an example of this being done?


----------



## Carl Steele (Jan 2, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Because murdering someone in a secure facility without any witnesses might be somewhat tricky? How did they get the key/s for his cell?


I really can't imagine how this could have happened.


----------



## seeformiles (Jan 2, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> Do you have an example of this being done?



Michael Hutchence?


----------



## cozmikbrew (Jan 2, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> He hung, sorry hanged, himself, with a strip of bedsheet, from the lower bunk? How does a man who's 6 feet tall do this?  He didn't have a cellmate (which he was required to have) and three cameras malfunctioned at the same time, and he was supposed to be looked in on every 30 minutes but wasn't. Leaving aside the availability of other materials which were more suitable for self-hanging than a bedsheet, and the argument over the damage to his neck, how does the suicide claim make any sense?


I thought that,if he was on suicide watch he should have been padded up with someone an looked in on every half hour


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 2, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> Whether suicide or murder (!) there are probably some guards somewhere with a larger than average pension. He could easily have paid people to look the other way.


So we're going by the theory that someone wanted him dead who was connected to a guard on the inside who managed to pay off co-workers to do the deed?


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 2, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> Er... he had a lot of kompromat on a lot of powerful people...
> 
> Btw, what's happened to that, and is it all in one place, destroyed, or disseminated widely among lesser kompromat holders?


what makes you think he still had any leverage?


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 2, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> So we're going by the theory that someone wanted him dead who was connected to a guard on the inside who managed to pay off co-workers to do the deed?


Not necessarily. I'm easily persuaded that Epstein himself could have persuaded people to look the other way. He was an expert conman. It's very possible they never even got paid.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 2, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> Do you have an example of this being done?


Not to hand, but i've read of these things. try the internet


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 2, 2022)

Orang Utan said:


> what makes you think he still had any leverage?


That he knew where the files were


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 2, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> The thing that interests me here is not so much did Epstein kill himself or not, and it seems to me unlikely that he did, but still possible, but I wonder why some people are so invested in the idea that he wasn't murdered, when the evidence is at best unclear.


cos it's so blatantly obvious he did kill himself, whereas the alternative is very unlikely


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 2, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> Not necessarily. I'm easily persuaded that Epstein himself could have persuaded people to look the other way. He was an expert conman. It's very possible they never even got paid.


Ah yes, but nobody is disputing it could have been suicide.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 2, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Ah yes, but nobody is disputing it could have been suicide.


Sorry - I'm suggesting he could have facilitated his own suicide by persuading his guards to look the other way. I'm not suggesting it was murder. I doubt it was but it could have been.


----------



## Carl Steele (Jan 2, 2022)

Orang Utan said:


> cos it's so blatantly obvious he did kill himself, whereas the alternative is very unlikely


Why is it so obvious?


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 2, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> That he knew where the files were


what makes you think he wouldn't have used all of that leverage already? that kompromat was never going to see the light of day but there was no need to off him to ensure this


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 2, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> Sorry - I'm suggesting he could have facilitated his own suicide by persuading his guards to look the other way. I'm not suggesting it was murder. I doubt it was but it could have been.


he wouldn't have needed to - it doesn't take half an hour to hang yourself


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 2, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> Why is it so obvious?


cos he was found hanging in his cell, while awaiting trial for trafficking and abuse and he knew he'd be found guilty


----------



## Carl Steele (Jan 2, 2022)

seeformiles said:


> Michael Hutchence?


Hutchence was apparently full of alcohol, prozac and cocaine which presumably Epstein wasn't. Hanging yourself in this way while drugged is somewhat different from doing it stone cold sober (I would imagine).


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 2, 2022)

Orang Utan said:


> what makes you think he wouldn't have used all of that leverage already? that kompromat was never going to see the light of day but there was no need to off him to ensure this


I don't know. It's complicated. He was a conman and a gambler and maybe his long game didn't pay off, the same way Maxwell's didn't. 

What do you think has happened to the kompromat? I'm pretty sure it will have been duplicated and more, and maybe that's how he lost his power.


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 2, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> Why is it so obvious?


He was facing a very long sentence without any of the comforts he was used to, and just couldn't take it anymore? 

Why is it not obvious?


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 2, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> Hutchence was apparently full of alcohol, prozac and cocaine which presumably Epstein wasn't. Hanging yourself in this way while drugged is somewhat different from doing it stone cold sober (I would imagine).


You forgot the bitter phonecall from Bob Geldorf.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 2, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> Hutchence was apparently full of alcohol, prozac and cocaine which presumably Epstein wasn't. Hanging yourself in this way while drugged is somewhat different from doing it stone cold sober (I would imagine).


so it would be even easier for Epstein to hang himself, as he wasn't as impaired as Hutchence


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 2, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> I don't know. It's complicated. He was a conman and a gambler and maybe his long game didn't pay off, the same way Maxwell's didn't.
> 
> What do you think has happened to the kompromat? I'm pretty sure it will have been duplicated and more, and maybe that's how he lost his power.


he'd have used it all already. offing him would be locking the stable door after the horse has bolted


----------



## Carl Steele (Jan 2, 2022)

equationgirl said:


> Why is it not obvious?


Have you read weltweit's Wikipedia account?


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 2, 2022)

equationgirl said:


> He was facing a very long sentence without any of the comforts he was used to, and just couldn't take it anymore?
> 
> Why is it not obvious?


I suppose it's not obvious because people who knew (or thought they knew) him believed it was totally out of character. 
Because a chancer will always try and throw the dice one more time.

But yeah, I reckon he did, but not that it's totally obvious.


----------



## seeformiles (Jan 2, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> Hutchence was apparently full of alcohol, prozac and cocaine which presumably Epstein wasn't. Hanging yourself in this way while drugged is somewhat different from doing it stone cold sober (I would imagine).



As far as I know it was a bit of a “stranglewank” (see also David Carradine) but this does not rule out a deliberate hanging attempt so it’s a perfectly possible and practical method.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 2, 2022)

Orang Utan said:


> he'd have used it all already. offing him would be locking the stable door after the horse has bolted


I'm not getting this. He could still have named names, pointed to evidence. He knew too much. 

I'm not saying he was murdered - I reckon on balance suicide is far more likely but that we will never know.


----------



## Carl Steele (Jan 2, 2022)

Orang Utan said:


> so it would be even easier for Epstein to hang himself, as he wasn't as impaired as Hutchence


You really want it to be true, you have no doubt, and I wonder why?


----------



## 8ball (Jan 2, 2022)

Orang Utan said:


> cos he was found hanging in his cell, while awaiting trial for trafficking and abuse and he knew he'd be found guilty



Bonus points awarded for conciseness and compactness with this argument - I’ve seen carrots with more fat on them.


----------



## seeformiles (Jan 2, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> You really want it to be true, you have no doubt, and I wonder why?



Fwiw I still suspect foul play


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 2, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> I'm not getting this. He could still have named names, pointed to evidence. He knew too much.


Bizarre then that he wasn't murdered the first time he was inside. Or at any time after.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 2, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> You really want it to be true, you have no doubt, and I wonder why?


No, you're the one making spurious claims.
I don't 'want' it to be true. I wonder what you wonder why I am making a rational argument


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 2, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Bizarre then that he wasn't murdered the first time he was inside. Or at any time after.


You mean, when he had the sweetheart deal? 
FGS
It was a situation of mutual assured destruction after that. 

FWIW, if you read my posts, I'm not saying it was murder. I reckon suicide far more likely. But murder before trial when he could have struck a deal isn't impossible.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 2, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> You mean, when he had the sweetheart deal?
> FGS
> It was a situation of mutual assured destruction after that.
> 
> FWIW, if you read my posts, I'm not saying it was murder. I reckon suicide far more likely. But murder before trial when he could have struck a deal isn't impossible.


But nobody knew he would get a sweetheart deal until he did. Hindsight is wonderful but nobody has a crystal ball.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 2, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> You mean, when he had the sweetheart deal?
> FGS
> It was a situation of mutual assured destruction after that.
> 
> FWIW, if you read my posts, I'm not saying it was murder. I reckon suicide far more likely. But murder before trial when he could have struck a deal isn't impossible.


would he not have struck that deal already?
i read people saying that Maxwell was going to name names during the trial to get a better deal, but that time had been and gone already


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 2, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> But nobody knew he would get a sweetheart deal until he did. Hindsight is wonderful but nobody has a crystal ball.


Eh?
Pretty sure he knew he'd get a sweetheart deal. 

Anyway, let's not derail further from speculation on the future of HWCS.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 2, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> Eh?
> Pretty sure he knew he'd get a sweetheart deal.
> 
> Anyway, let's not derail further from speculation on the future of HWCS.


it's not really a derailment is it


----------



## Carl Steele (Jan 2, 2022)

Orang Utan said:


> I don't 'want' it to be true. I wonder what you wonder why I am making a rational argument


You don't know what happened. The evidence is uncertain. Being completely sure is not rational.


----------



## Ming (Jan 2, 2022)

Psychiatric nurse calling (locked units in acute, tertiary and forensic mental health units). I’ve actually cut a ligature off a patient. For what it’s worth i always thought this stunk. He would not have been able to end his life on any of the units I’ve worked on. Because of his impending trial and the subsequent associated stress (trigger factor +++) he’d have likely been put on a 1:1 (especially as he’d already attempted suicide). And every member of staff would have been acutely aware of his situation. Guards falling asleep (All of them????). No chance. CCTV out? Ours goes out from time to time but we call security and they fix it within the hour generally. And we’d make sure we put a stable cell mate in with him who was working with us If it was possible. I’m aware his lawyer petitioned to have his cell mate removed. That should have been rejected by the prison management. It’s not a hard argument to make.


----------



## Combustible (Jan 2, 2022)

Orang Utan said:


> he'd have used it all already. offing him would be locking the stable door after the horse has bolted


As it happens I don't think so, even though he very likely did kill himself. His best chance of using the information to get off would be formally cooperating with authorities in exchange for reduced charges and sentence, so he wouldn't want to disclose anything before this process. But that would require him to be able to provide enough evidence to convict people who the US authorities wanted to convict more than him. And if he couldn't use the information to get off I can't imagine people like him releasing it in some sort of final fuck you, more likely he knew he reached the end of the road and acted accordingly (much like Robert Maxwell)


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 2, 2022)

Carl Steele said:


> You don't know what happened. The evidence is uncertain. Being completely sure is not rational.


precisely. so why introduce the wild irrational speculation of him being murdered?


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 2, 2022)

Combustible said:


> As it happens I don't think so, even though he very likely did kill himself. His best chance of using the information to get off would be formally cooperating with authorities in exchange for reduced charges and sentence, so he wouldn't want to disclose anything before this process. *But that would require him to be able to provide enough evidence to convict people who the US authorities wanted to convict more than him*. And if he couldn't use the information to get off I can't imagine people like him releasing it in some sort of final fuck you, more likely he knew he reached the end of the road and acted accordingly (much like Robert Maxwell)


Exactly - so no one!


----------



## 8ball (Jan 2, 2022)

Orang Utan said:


> precisely. so why introduce the wild irrational speculation of him being murdered?



I don’t think you’ve fully addressed the point there.  I still have you ahead on points, though.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 2, 2022)

8ball said:


> I don’t think you’ve fully addressed the point there.  I still have you ahead on points, though.


Only because it came from faulty reasoning. That I have an agenda. That I am sure of the truth.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 2, 2022)

Orang Utan said:


> Only because it came from faulty reasoning. That I have an agenda. That I am sure of the truth.



Don’t address me - address the point! 

You got this.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 2, 2022)

8ball said:


> Don’t address me - address the point!
> 
> You got this.


Not sure what it is


----------



## 8ball (Jan 2, 2022)

Orang Utan said:


> Not sure what it is



I feel duty bound not to give you any prompts.


----------



## mx wcfc (Jan 2, 2022)

equationgirl said:


> He was facing a very long sentence without any of the comforts he was used to, and just couldn't take it anymore?




(sorry)


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 2, 2022)

Oh ffs, can people grow up?

The cunt topped himself. No one broke in and done it. No one paid guards to do it.

He knew he fluked it before and that he wouldn’t again. Life in stir as a nonce is all he had.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 3, 2022)

Either his lawyers are olfactorily overdoing it on the _miscellaneous client expenses fund_, or they're testing out a new legal strategy based on Derren Brown's THIS IS THE WINNING TICKET spiel...









						Court to unseal deal between Jeffrey Epstein and Virginia Giuffre
					

Prince Andrew’s lawyers believe 2009 agreement could shield him from Giuffre’s civil sexual assault lawsuit




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 3, 2022)

Can someone please explain to me in simple terms why it's to Windsor's advantage to argue that he's a beneficiary of this agreement? If he insists he's covered doesn't it just show that he's implicated but can't be sued? Mind you, 'can't be sued' has significant financial advantages and maybe that matters more than reputation at this stage.









						Court to unseal deal between Jeffrey Epstein and Virginia Giuffre
					

Prince Andrew’s lawyers believe 2009 agreement could shield him from Giuffre’s civil sexual assault lawsuit




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## 8ball (Jan 3, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> Mind you, 'can't be sued' has significant financial advantages and maybe that matters more than reputation at this stage.



Can’t say this would be my ideal fallback position at this point.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 3, 2022)

The line that he was killed to avoid him revealing stuff in a sweatheart deal seems flawed, particularly if the argument is that it's the government who would have been _offering _that deal that actually _killed him_.  In other words, they killed him to stop him releasing information that they were offering a deal which would have _required_ him to release.  The only way that kind of analysis works is if it was 'rogue elements' or a bloke that Alan Dershovitz knew down the pub who killed him. Well, applied for a job in NY Corrections, then got assigned to the right prison, then got on the right shift on the right day, on the right wing, then bribed the other guards, then fecked the cctv ... and _then _killed him.


----------



## Weller (Jan 3, 2022)

8ball said:


> Can’t say this would be my ideal fallback position at this point.


All else has failed so far though and if  the deal that Epstein got and who etc were shielded  from action in his first conviction  is going to be released  ,  as well as Giuffres deal hopefully unredacted , him  being instructed that several maybe many victims of of Maxwell and Epstein will be giving victim impact statements including  Giuffre before Ghislanes  sentencing it may not be ideal but surely a court case could now bring out much more damaging stuff connections made etc

They have also been told that there are at least 6 witnesses who will appear to say he was there when he said he wasn't or couldnt remember some meetings  , things are not going as planned since his appearance on T.V you could see how shocked he was when he was told others he knew that were at Epsteins house had already spoken about him being there

Whos to say what else there may be or whos  in the original deal hushed up for years there was a  an outcry about Epsteins deal  that allowed him out of prison every day to work in his penthouse suite office as well as keeping him and others from investigation for years

He doesn't seem to have any witnesses even his own daughter to say they were at a pizza party or proof he cant sweat , if hes lied and hes mentioned in the deal or implicated in other things in the case 

Randy Andy as the newspapers here once called him regular was a very very good friend and visitor , user of Epsteins jet and holiday homes it seems for many years I find it hard to believe if hes guilty it was just with the 1 girl that kept a photo or somebody else released really there could be more at stake


----------



## 8ball (Jan 3, 2022)

It’s… definitely sticky.


----------



## Weller (Jan 3, 2022)

8ball said:


> It’s… definitely sticky.


----------



## Ming (Jan 3, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Oh ffs, can people grow up?
> 
> The cunt topped himself. No one broke in and done it. No one paid guards to do it.
> 
> He knew he fluked it before and that he wouldn’t again. Life in stir as a nonce is all he had.


To reiterate. It's easy in a professional and well run facility to prevent someone in crisis from killing themselves. I've been doing it for 13 years in 3 countries. No deaths on my wards. The best i would say in this case was he was allowed enough space to kill himself. Imagine the amount of media attention the staff must have known they were under. If i was in their shoes i'd have been double vigilant. But they weren't. They ignored the most basic SOPs. Now why is that? TBH I wouldn't be surprised if Maxwell went the same way. It's the powers that be saying 'i'll kill you in public because i can'. To set another example.


----------



## a_chap (Jan 3, 2022)




----------



## Athos (Jan 3, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> Can someone please explain to me in simple terms why it's to Windsor's advantage to argue that he's a beneficiary of this agreement? If he insists he's covered doesn't it just show that he's implicated but can't be sued? Mind you, 'can't be sued' has significant financial advantages and maybe that matters more than reputation at this stage.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The advantage is being immune from civil proceedings.  There's no real disadvantage*, since being covered by the agreement doesn't mean (in law, at least) that he did anything.  *Obviously, it doesn't look great, but then most people already think he did it, and that wouldn't change even if he successfully defended the claim, so nothing to lose, really.


----------



## scalyboy (Jan 3, 2022)

Weller said:


> View attachment 304294


Is it just me, or is that one of those Magic Tree car deodorisers at far left, below the speech bubble and parallel to the royal elbow?
The sort of deodoriser someone might hang on a door if there was a sweaty nonce leaping and cavorting around the room?
Just a thought 😃


----------



## scalyboy (Jan 3, 2022)

Athos said:


> The advantage is being immune from civil proceedings.  There's no real disadvantage*, since being covered by the agreement doesn't mean (in law, at least) that he did anything.  *Obviously, it doesn't look great, but then most people already think he did it, and that wouldn't change even if he successfully defended the claim, so nothing to lose, really.


Makes sense. Yes it doesn’t look great, but even if - in his tower of arrogance, foolishness and entitlement - he cannot see it yet, his lawyers may have explained to him that his reputation is already f**ked anyway.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 3, 2022)

Athos said:


> The advantage is being immune from civil proceedings.  There's no real disadvantage*, since being covered by the agreement doesn't mean (in law, at least) that he did anything.  *Obviously, it doesn't look great, but then most people already think he did it, and that wouldn't change even if he successfully defended the claim, so nothing to lose, really.


Much depends on the contents of the agreement (when do we get to see it?). He might have to admit to being a nonce rapist to be covered for example. His lawyers have claimed it covers him but when the terms come out that claim of cover in itself might be hugely damaging.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 3, 2022)

I think the truly honourable thing to happen would be for the queen to behead him on the balcony of Buck Pal.


----------



## Athos (Jan 3, 2022)

TopCat said:


> Much depends on the contents of the agreement (when do we get to see it?). He might have to admit to being a nonce rapist to be covered for example. His lawyers have claimed it covers him but when the terms come out that claim of cover in itself might be hugely damaging.


There's absolutely no chance it'll be in those terms.  If it was, he'd not seek to rely on it, since he'd be opening himself to a criminal prosecution (and they'd have sought to keep it secret).

It's likely to be a list of individuals and entities, by name or class, that's she's barred from proceeding against (without prejudice to liability).  I suspect there's a term in there about "royalty", but the question will be whether that suffices or whether there's some other qualification, either explicitly in the agreement, or implied.

But we'll see very soon - due to be unsealed from today; could be as early as 1400 our time.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 3, 2022)

TopCat said:


> I think the truly honourable thing to happen would be for the queen to behead him on the balcony of Buck Pal.



She’s getting on a bit, but it wouldn’t be right to have a machine do it.  I reckon let her have up to 20 medically-supervised swings.


----------



## bemused (Jan 3, 2022)

When does he pay the claimant off with our money?


----------



## Athos (Jan 3, 2022)

bemused said:


> When does he pay the claimant off with our money?


If and when he loses the procedural arguments, he'll have three options:

1. To settle.  But this requires the plaintiff's agreement. 
2. To refuse to participate in the proceedings.  Judgement would be entered against him, but he'd be gambling on it not being enforceable here. 
3. Contested proceedings.  A full trial, with him giving evidence on oath.  Which would be a media circus, with the potential for loads of embarrassing stuff to come out, and for him to lose.  Of course, he might win; it's still an uphill battle for her to prove that they had sex, never mind that he knew she was trafficked.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 3, 2022)

Athos said:


> If and when he loses the procedural arguments, he'll have three options:
> 
> 1. To settle.  But this requires the plaintiff's agreement.
> 2. To refuse to participate in the proceedings.  Judgement would be entered against him, but he'd be gambling on it not being enforceable here.
> 3. Contested proceedings.  A full trial, with him giving evidence on oath.  Which would be a media circus, with the potential for loads of embarrassing stuff to come out, and for him to lose.  Of course, he might win; it's still an uphill battle for her to prove that they had sex, never mind that he knew she was trafficked.



I reckon it will be option 1.  Draws a line under things and gives a little mental
wiggle-room to deluded Royalists.


----------



## Idris2002 (Jan 3, 2022)

Ming said:


> To reiterate. It's easy in a professional and well run facility to prevent someone in crisis from killing themselves. I've been doing it for 13 years in 3 countries. No deaths on my wards. The best i would say in this case was he was allowed enough space to kill himself. Imagine the amount of media attention the staff must have known they were under. If i was in their shoes i'd have been double vigilant. But they weren't. They ignored the most basic SOPs. Now why is that? TBH I wouldn't be surprised if Maxwell went the same way. It's the powers that be saying 'i'll kill you in public because i can'. To set another example.


When LVF leader Billy Wright was assasinated in prison in Northern Ireland by the INLA, one of the details of the case was that state-of-the-art CCTV cameras had failed on the day.


----------



## bemused (Jan 3, 2022)

I can't see why he wouldn't settle if he can't get it dismissed.


----------



## Spymaster (Jan 3, 2022)

bemused said:


> I can't see why he wouldn't settle if he can't get it dismissed.



Because he might think that he'd win a trial and be vindicated. It's a dangerous game but far from out of the question.


----------



## Flavour (Jan 3, 2022)

Don't want to get my hopes up for a trial but in the unlikely event one does go ahead it will be obscenely glorious and I just hope Brenda will still be around and lucid enough to really process what a terrible mess it is


----------



## bemused (Jan 3, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> Because he might think that he'd win a trial and be vindicated. It's a dangerous game but far from out of the question.


Given he has a 24/7/365 security there must be a UK government record of where he's been. If he's innocent he can wheel that out, if he was on child abuse Island at the time I can't see why he'd go to trial.


----------



## Petcha (Jan 3, 2022)

Only just caught up with this, but his lawyers seem fairly clear she signed something absolving any of Epstein's mates of guilt - is that the gist? 

Of course the whiff will always hang over the Andy but it would be a massive shame if this is the case.


----------



## bemused (Jan 3, 2022)

Petcha said:


> Only just caught up with this, but his lawyers seem fairly clear she signed something absolving any of Epstein's mates of guilt - is that the gist?
> 
> Of course the whiff will always hang over the Andy but it would be a massive shame if this is the case.


Pretty much, I'm sure her legal team read it before taking on the case.


----------



## Athos (Jan 3, 2022)

8ball said:


> I reckon it will be option 1.  Draws a line under things and gives a little mental
> wiggle-room to deluded Royalists.


Yes, unless she insits on her day in court, no matter what he offers.


----------



## Athos (Jan 3, 2022)

Petcha said:


> Only just caught up with this, but his lawyers seem fairly clear she signed something absolving any of Epstein's mates of guilt - is that the gist?
> 
> Of course the whiff will always hang over the Andy but it would be a massive shame if this is the case.


Yes.  But the exact terms are not yet available to the public; should be relased today.


----------



## Petcha (Jan 3, 2022)

bemused said:


> Pretty much, I'm sure her legal team read it before taking on the case.



Well that's a bit of an anti-climax. I wonder if they specifically name names then. I think Bill Clinton at least should be a little worried given his track record.


----------



## Athos (Jan 3, 2022)

Here it is.

_'2. General Release. Virginia Roberts and her agent(s), attorney(s), predecessor(s), successor(s), heir(s), administrator(s), and/or assign(s) (hereinafter, “First Parties”), for and in consideration of the sum of Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500,000.00) and other valuable consideration, received from or on behalf of Jeffrey Epstein and his agent(s), attorney(s), predecessor(s), successor(s), heir(s), administrator(s), assign(s) and/or employee(s) (hereinafter, “Second Parties’), the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, *HEREBY remise, release, acquit, satisfy, and forever discharge the said Second Parties and any other person or entity who could have been included as a potential defendant (“Other Potential Defendants”) from all, and all manner of, action and actions of Virginia Roberts, including State or Federal, cause and causes of action (common law or statutory), suits, debts, dues, sums of money, accounts, reckonings, bonds, bills, specialties, covenants, contracts, controversies, agreements, promises, variances, trespasses, damages, judgments, executions, claims, and demands whatsoever in law or in equity for compensatory or punitive damages that said First Parties ever had or now have, or that any personal representative, successor, heir, or assign of said First Parties hereafter can, shall, or may have, against Jeffrey Epstein, or Other Potential Defendants for, upon, or by reason of any matter, cause, or thing whatsoever (whether known or unknown), from the beginning of the world to the day of this release.* The issue of amount of attorneys’ fees and costs is specifically addressed in Paragraph 8, Attorneys’ Fees and Costs. is further agreed that this Settlement Agreement represents a final resolution of a disputed claim and is intended to avoid litigation. *This Setttement Agreement shall not be construed to be an admission of liability or fault by any party.*'_


----------



## Athos (Jan 3, 2022)

And here's the unsealed motion to dismiss the claim against Windsor, based upon the agreement with Epstein.

_'A. 2009 Settlement and Release Agreement (Exhibit A) On May 1, 2009, using the pseudonym Jane Doe No. 102, plaintiff Virginia Giuffre sued Jeffrey Epstein in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida in an action styled, Jane Doe No. 102 v. Epstein, No. 09-cv-80656-KAM (S.D. Fla. May 1, 2009) (the “Epstein Action”). Plaintiff and Epstein settled the case in November 2009. As part of the settlement, plaintiff agreed to release Epstein and numerous other individuals and entities from any and all liability arising from their alleged misconduct. *That 2009 Settlement and General Release Agreement (the “Release Agreement”), a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A, is dispositive of this action, in that it provides a complete release of any claims and/or potential claims that Plaintiff could have asserted against Prince Andrew.* In light of this same Release Agreement, Plaintiff voluntarily dismissed her battery claims against Epstein’s former attorney, Alan Dershowitz, that she asserted in the parallel proceeding pending before Judge Preska, Giuffre v. Dershowitz, No. 19-cv-03377-LAP (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 16, 2021) (the “Dershowitz Action”) [ECF No. 331]. A copy of the Release Agreement also was filed in the Dershowitz Action. See Dershowitz, No. 19-cv-03377-LAP (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 8, 2021) [ECF Nos. 334-1 (sealed), 335-1 (redacted)], and accordingly, is an appropriate subject of judicial notice here. “Settlement agreements are documents of which a court may take judicial notice in order to determine whether future claims are barred by a previous settlement.” Deylli v. Novartis Pharm. Corp., No. 13-cv-06669 (NSR), 2014 WL 2757470, at *4 (S.D.N.Y. June 16, 2014) (taking judicial notice of settlement agreement in a related case).'_


----------



## Athos (Jan 3, 2022)

And here, subject to some redactions, is the Plaintiff's response to motion to dismiss based on the settlement agreement.

The important bits are too lengthy to quote, but can be found at pages 7 to 17.


----------



## Athos (Jan 3, 2022)

On the face of it, the agreement would appear to cover Windsor, but, Giuffre has some decent legal arguments as to why it shouldn't, in particular: i) the court can't take it into consideration, becasue it wasn't publicly filed; ii) it doesn't cover him, becuse he wasn't a potential defendant to those proceedings, for procedural/jurisdictional reasons; iii) that the agreement was effectively superceded by a later one (that didn't cover Prince Andrew)); and, iv) the parties didn't intend to release him.

It could go either way - too close to call.  The court will consider this issue at tomorrow's hearing.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 3, 2022)

Doesn’t specifically mention him. The judge will decide tomorrow. The same judge that has already said, “Let's cut out all the technicalities and _get to the substance_,”


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 3, 2022)

It seems incredibly widely drawn. Effectively, Roberts releases Epstein



> and any other person or entity who could have been included as a potential
> defendant (“Other Potential Defendants”) from all, and all manner of, action and actions of Virginia Roberts, including State or Federal, cause and causes of action [...] against Jeffrey Epstein, or Other Potential Defendants for, upon, or by reason of any matter, cause, or thing whatsoever (whether known or unknown), from the beginning of the world to the day of this release [...]


This is the thing that's always puzzled me - how can Windsor claim protection under the release without admitting he was a potential defendant? Or does the fact that Roberts/Giuffre is suing him make him a potential defendant by definition? Could it prevent her from ever suing anyone anywhere for anything ever?
That would be unconscionable.

I'm still thinking that Windsor imagines he can get away with it though.

ETA obvs she can sue for things that occurred post release but equally obvs that doesn't apply to Windsor


----------



## Athos (Jan 3, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Doesn’t specifically mention him. The judge will decide tomorrow. The same judge that has already said, “Let's cut out all the technicalities and _get to the substance_,”



That was in respect of them playing silly buggers on the issue of service; as the judge rightly noted, it was inevitable he'd be served eventually, so it made no sense to keep arguing the issue.  But whether or not someone is barred from pursuing a claim is a significantly more substantive issue.  Though, obviously, I hope you're right and he fails tomorrow (and on the ultimate point, in due course).


----------



## Athos (Jan 3, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> It seems incredibly widely drawn. Effectively, Roberts releases Epstein
> 
> 
> This is the thing that's always puzzled me - how can Windsor claim protection under the release without admitting he was a potential defendant? Or does the fact that Roberts/Giuffre is suing him make him a potential defendant by definition? Could it prevent her from ever suing anyone anywhere for anything ever?
> ...


Yes, it does seem wide, but, on the other hand, Andrew was pretty obviously a potential defendant at the time she settled with Epstein; she knew who he was, and what he had done, and the issue of royalty had already been raised in proceedings.  But she does have the technical arguments about whether or not he was a potential defendant for the purposes of those proceedings, based on jurisdiction, as well as the other procedural points.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 3, 2022)

The key is this part:



> _plaintiff Virginia Giuffre sued Jeffrey Epstein in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida in an action styled, Jane Doe No. 102 v. Epstein, No. 09-cv-80656-KAM (S.D. Fla. May 1, 2009)_



What did Giuffre sue Epstein for, and could she have included Nonce Andrew as co-defendant in that very specific action?  If so, he cannot be a defendant here -- although, I think this is only true if this amounts to a re-run of the same action but with a different name on the ticket.  If the Nonce of York couldn't have been named in that other action and/or(?) if this is a different action, the release is worthless.


----------



## kenny g (Jan 3, 2022)

I always find US law a head twist but based on my skim reading I reckon this will still go to trial. The 2009 agreement has to be read in its context otherwise it becomes so wide as to be unjust.


----------



## Thora (Jan 3, 2022)

I'm not sure "but the victim promised she wouldn't go after the rest of us" is the argument I'd want to take if I was trying to look innocent


----------



## Athos (Jan 3, 2022)

Thora said:


> I'm not sure "but the victim promised she wouldn't go after the rest of us" is the argument I'd want to take if I was trying to look innocent


I guess it'd depend on whether you thought you'd be be vindicated if it went to trial, which, in turn, would depend on whether or not you did it.  Getting off on a 'technicality' might be your best outcome.


----------



## Athos (Jan 3, 2022)

kenny g said:


> I always find US law a head twist but based on my skim reading I reckon this will still go to trial. The 2009 agreement has to be read in its context otherwise it becomes so wide as to be unjust.


I think you're probably right; there seems too much in the motion to dismiss that amounts to a factual dispute not to allow it to proceed to trial.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 3, 2022)

Thora said:


> I'm not sure "but the victim promised she wouldn't go after the rest of us" is the argument I'd want to take if I was trying to look innocent



I think the point is that they don’t phrase it the way you just did.


----------



## Athos (Jan 3, 2022)

kabbes said:


> The key is this part:
> 
> 
> 
> What did Giuffre sue Epstein for, and could she have included Nonce Andrew as co-defendant in that very specific action?  If so, he cannot be a defendant here -- although, I think this is only true if this amounts to a re-run of the same action but with a different name on the ticket.  If the Nonce of York couldn't have been named in that other action and/or(?) if this is a different action, the release is worthless.


That's essentially what's she's saying; that he couln't have been included in the Florida 2009 proceedings, becuase the subject matter was different, and because the court didn't have jurisdiction in respect of him.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 3, 2022)

Petcha said:


> Only just caught up with this, but his lawyers seem fairly clear she signed something absolving any of Epstein's mates of guilt - is that the gist?



I thought he wasn’t Epstein’s mate.


----------



## andysays (Jan 3, 2022)

Athos said:


> I guess it'd depend on whether you thought you'd be be vindicated if it went to trial, which, in turn, would depend on whether or not you did it.  Getting off on a 'technicality' might be your best outcome.


If being vindicated was your aim, and if you genuinely thought you'd be vindicated if it went to trial, I can't see why you'd go through all these ridiculous and frankly desperate legal maneuverings to try to avoid it getting to trial.

Whatever the eventual legal outcome, his reputation is utterly destroyed forever. If that was (part of) Virginia Guiffre's aim, I think she's pretty much achieved it already.


----------



## bemused (Jan 3, 2022)

andysays said:


> If being vindicated was your aim, and if you genuinely thought you'd be vindicated if it went to trial, I can't see why you'd go through all these ridiculous and frankly desperate legal maneuverings to try to avoid it getting to trial.
> 
> Whatever the eventual legal outcome, his reputation is utterly destroyed forever. If that was (part of) Virginia Guiffre's aim, I think she's pretty much achieved it already.


Getting is dismissed saves months maybe years and all the associated costs. Pretty standard practice.


----------



## Athos (Jan 3, 2022)

andysays said:


> If being vindicated was your aim, and if you genuinely thought you'd be vindicated if it went to trial, I can't see why you'd go through all these ridiculous and frankly desperate legal maneuverings to try to avoid it getting to trial.


That was my point.


----------



## andysays (Jan 3, 2022)

bemused said:


> Getting is dismissed saves months maybe years and all the associated costs. Pretty standard practice.


But if the process of getting it dismissed results in your reputation being destroyed, what have you actually achieved?


----------



## weltweit (Jan 3, 2022)

andysays said:


> But if the process of getting it dismissed results in your reputation being destroyed, what have you actually achieved?


But but surely he is far too honourable ..


----------



## bemused (Jan 3, 2022)

andysays said:


> But if the process of getting it dismissed results in your reputation being destroyed, what have you actually achieved?


How would a judge dismissing a case before trial destroy a reputation?  Although, with Adny I think that ship has sailed, struck a reef and sunk.


----------



## Athos (Jan 3, 2022)

andysays said:


> But if the process of getting it dismissed results in your reputation being destroyed, what have you actually achieved?


It's destroyed anyway.  And will be even if a court doesn't find in her favour.

Having it kicked out early protects his fortune, and avoids the risk of a court finding of noncery.


----------



## not a trot (Jan 3, 2022)

Petcha said:


> Well that's a bit of an anti-climax. I wonder if they specifically name names then. I think *Bill Clinton at least should be a little worried given his track record.*



That episode of Family Guy was a little disturbing.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 3, 2022)

As an aside, I note Fergie, the princesses, their husbands and kids are holidaying in Switzerland, with Andy too scarred to leave the grounds of Windsor Great Park


----------



## quiet guy (Jan 3, 2022)

He'll always be worried going overseas Incase someone has a warrant out for his arrest


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 3, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> As an aside, I note Fergie, the princesses, their husbands and kids are holidaying in Switzerland, with Andy too scarred to leave the grounds of Windsor Great Park


I thought he was just too frightened to go. He must have cut himself up bad


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 3, 2022)

quiet guy said:


> He'll always be worried going overseas Incase someone has a warrant out for his arrest


Hence the scarring, to make it difficult to identify him


----------



## steveseagull (Jan 3, 2022)

quiet guy said:


> He'll always be worried going overseas Incase someone has a warrant out for his arrest


I read somewhere that he cancelled a trip to Spain in the summer as they could sling his arse to the United States. I suspect there is not anywhere he can go without having to look over his shoulder.


----------



## seeformiles (Jan 3, 2022)

steveseagull said:


> I read somewhere that he cancelled a trip to Spain in the summer as they could sling his arse to the United States. I suspect there is not anywhere he can go without having to look over his shoulder.



Holidays in Bridlington it is then


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 3, 2022)

How he is viewed in the US


Prince Andrew interview is a PR nightmare and a national joke


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 3, 2022)

steveseagull said:


> I read somewhere that he cancelled a trip to Spain in the summer as they could sling his arse to the United States. I suspect there is not anywhere he can go without having to look over his shoulder.




Switzerland could have been safe after Polanski, or perhaps they don’t want to get a rep for paedo-protection and he couldn’t take the chance.


----------



## dessiato (Jan 3, 2022)

seeformiles said:


> Holidays in Bridlington it is then


There's some nice beaches there. Prince Ponce would like the naturist beach.


----------



## Yossarian (Jan 3, 2022)

steveseagull said:


> I read somewhere that he cancelled a trip to Spain in the summer as they could sling his arse to the United States. I suspect there is not anywhere he can go without having to look over his shoulder.



Pitcairn Island?


----------



## andysays (Jan 3, 2022)

Athos said:


> *It's destroyed anyway.*  And will be even if a court doesn't find in her favour.
> 
> Having it kicked out early protects his fortune, and avoids the risk of a court finding of noncery.


And that was my point.

The various steps he has taken to avoid the case getting to court have in effect achieved the reputational damage he's seeking to avoid.


----------



## Athos (Jan 3, 2022)

andysays said:


> And that was my point.
> 
> The various steps he has taken to avoid the case getting to court have in effect caused the reputational damage he's seeking to avoid.


But, if those steps are effective in having the case struck out, they may have been successful in preventing even worse reputational damage i.e. a court finding him a nonce, and the financial implications.


----------



## xenon (Jan 3, 2022)

steveseagull said:


> I read somewhere that he cancelled a trip to Spain in the summer as they could sling his arse to the United States. I suspect there is not anywhere he can go without having to look over his shoulder.



Sounds like bollocks, being as this is a civil case. I don't think extrodition applies for those does it.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 3, 2022)

xenon said:


> Sounds like bollocks, being as this is a civil case. I don't think extrodition applies for those does it.



The FBI want to speak to him though.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 3, 2022)

Spain wouldn’t send him anyway, but I reckon they (and many others) would piss themselves if they could nick him whilst asking the Shermans if they wanted him, even if they only held him for a couple of hours it would be fucking gold.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 3, 2022)

It would probably be a diplomatic incident. Arresting a nonce. This is where we’re at.


----------



## kenny g (Jan 3, 2022)

xenon said:


> Sounds like bollocks, being as this is a civil case. I don't think extrodition applies for those does it.


Difficult to know what the US have up their sleeves re criminal investigations at the best of time. He could always try the Ecuadorian embassy.


----------



## Duncan2 (Jan 3, 2022)

It would be rather astonishing if Prince Andrew were to be allowed to rely on this release agreement.Its vague as has been said upthread but to the point of being meaningless surely.When Guiffre went to law in 2009 she in fact thought it prudent to sue Epstein but literally every individual of capacity within the jurisdiction could have been her target?


----------



## kenny g (Jan 3, 2022)

> 15. Defendant objects to the definition of the terms “Jeffrey Epstein” and “Epstein” as overbroad, vague and ambiguous to the extent it incorporates persons and entities of which Defendant has no knowledge. For purposes of responding to these Requests, Defendant understands “Jeffrey Epstein” and “Epstein” to mean Jeffrey Epstein.





> 16. Defendant objects to the definition of the terms “Ghislaine Maxwell” and “Maxwell” as overbroad, vague and ambiguous to the extent it incorporates persons and entities of which Defendant has no knowledge. For purposes of responding to these Requests, Defendant understands “Ghislaine Maxwell” and “Maxwell” to mean Ghislaine Maxwell.


Exhibit B – #60, Att. #2 in Giuffre v. Prince Andrew (S.D.N.Y., 1:21-cv-06702) – CourtListener.com 

My knowledge of US civil legal practice is pretty much fuck all but I can't imagine the above points exactly winning over and impressing any Court. Trawling through the document gives me the impression Andrew's team are just stringing out their fees at the moment. If it isn't already obvious I reckon he is in deep trouble with this action.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 3, 2022)

wut


----------



## kenny g (Jan 3, 2022)

This is the response to the request for evidence of sweating issues and pizza visits.

It goes on:



> 18.    Defendant objects to the definition of the terms “You” and “Your” as overbroad,
> 
> vague, ambiguous and unduly burdensome to the extent it attempts to expand the scope of these
> 
> ...


----------



## two sheds (Jan 3, 2022)

wut


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 3, 2022)

Confess I haven't looked at Exhibit B yet but if the terms 'Ghislaine Maxwell' and 'Maxwell' are 'overbroad', what the hell is the term 'Other Potential Defendants'?


----------



## kenny g (Jan 3, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> Confess I haven't looked at Exhibit B yet but if the terms 'Ghislaine Maxwell' and 'Maxwell' are 'overbroad', what the hell is the term 'Other Potential Defendants'?


It all reads like something written by someone on prescription speed pills. Which it probably is.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 3, 2022)

Ok, I've started reading it and see now that so much of it is just evasive boilerplate. Then I get to Request 6:



> All gifts or other things of value and all Documents concerning all gifts or other things of value that You received from Epstein or Maxwell (including any Agent thereof), including but not limited to puppets.



Puppets? wtf?

(Still reading...)


----------



## two sheds (Jan 3, 2022)

You'd think a judge would look at that and start ignoring any other points 'the Defence' starts making.

Still not sure those are actual quotes tbh.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 3, 2022)

Re puppets:








						Prince Andrew Allegedly Used a Puppet of Himself to Grope Victims at Jeffrey Epstein’s Home
					

The allegations were detailed in Virginia Roberts Giuffre’s unpublished manuscript, which was part of a trove of recently unsealed court documents.




					www.vanityfair.com


----------



## two sheds (Jan 3, 2022)

Are they using Giuliani as lawyer?


----------



## two sheds (Jan 3, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> Re puppets:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Jesus


----------



## two sheds (Jan 3, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> Ok, I've started reading it and see now that so much of it is just evasive boilerplate. Then I get to Request 6:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


what exactly are they requesting? that they're produced in court/evidence?


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 3, 2022)

two sheds said:


> what exactly are they requesting? that they're produced in court/evidence?


Yes, it's a request for discovery.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 3, 2022)

so he's saying she's got his Spitting Image puppet? 

sorry I'm a bit confused here


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 3, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> Re puppets:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 3, 2022)

two sheds said:


> so he's saying she's got his Spitting Image puppet?
> 
> sorry I'm a bit confused here


Ah, well, there’s a problem here. It’s not a puppet, it’s a simple caricature.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 3, 2022)

No, she's asking for him to produce it and documents relating to it. Exhibit B is Windsor's lawyers' response to Giuffre's lawyers' request for pre-trial production of documents etc.


----------



## tim (Jan 3, 2022)

andysays said:


> But if the process of getting it dismissed results in your reputation being destroyed, what have you actually achieved?


If your reputation has already been destroyed getting it dismissed would make life easier than going through the rigmarole of a full trial


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 3, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> Re puppets:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Tbf when I was 15 a 16 year old female wanked me off with a Gordon the Gofer puppet, so it could be a thing for child abusers


----------



## tim (Jan 3, 2022)

two sheds said:


> so he's saying she's got his Spitting Image puppet?
> 
> sorry I'm a bit confused here


It was actually John Sessions doing his Prince Andrew impersonation that she met when she was with Epstein. He had worked on Spitting Image and so had access to the puppet.


----------



## 1927 (Jan 3, 2022)

kenny g said:


> This is the response to the request for evidence of sweating issues and pizza visits.
> 
> It goes on:


I wonder how much his lawyers charged the royal nonce to write that crap!


----------



## two sheds (Jan 3, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> No, she's asking for him to produce it and documents relating to it. Exhibit B is Windsor's lawyers' response to Giuffre's lawyers' request for pre-trial production of documents etc.


I'm not still really following - so she wants it for dna evidence for example? 

urggh sorry


----------



## 1927 (Jan 3, 2022)

two sheds said:


> I'm not still really following - so she wants it for dna evidence for example?
> 
> urggh sorry


I think they are just asking he who cant sweat to list all the gifts he was ever given by Epstein or Maxwell.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 3, 2022)

two sheds said:


> I'm not still really following - so she wants it for dna evidence for example?
> 
> urggh sorry


Who knows? The relevant part of his objection (which is otherwise full of standard phrasing objections) says:



> Defendant objects to this Request on the grounds that it is harassing and seeks confidential and private information and documents that are irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Defendant further objects to this Request on the grounds that it assumes facts not in evidence, including without limitation by perpetuating Plaintiff’s false claim that Defendant received a puppet as a gift from Epstein or Maxwell


----------



## two sheds (Jan 3, 2022)

ta that makes more sense 

so objects to the request .... rather than just saying he hasn't got it


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 3, 2022)

two sheds said:


> ta that makes more sense
> 
> so objects to the request .... rather than just saying he hasn't got it


Yes. That's pretty much his response to all the requests. 

Other people can explain the procedure better than me (IANAL), but on the face of it he's being as unco-operative as possible.


----------



## Petcha (Jan 3, 2022)

So he's not even really bothering to deny this anymore, but relying on various legal loopholes? What an utter shit.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 3, 2022)

Petcha said:


> So he's not even really bothering to deny this anymore, but relying on various legal loopholes? What an utter shit.


I'm pretty sure that if the legal loopholes fail he'll continue to deny it. But will try and settle out of court. Him swearing on oath is the last thing he needs.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 3, 2022)

And bit of a remarkable defence that asking for a puppet is "harassing and seeks confidential and private information and documents"

"help, help I'm being repressed"


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 3, 2022)

two sheds said:


> "help, help I'm being repressed"


Tbf, it must feel like that to somebody who has spent their life with unimaginable privilege who rarely hears the word no.


----------



## Athos (Jan 3, 2022)

His responses are pretty standard practice for the hardball lawyers acting for him.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 3, 2022)

true, still fucking shifty though


----------



## Wilf (Jan 3, 2022)

Weller said:


> Randy Andy as the newspapers here once called him regular was a very very good friend and visitor , user of Epsteins jet and holiday homes it seems for many years I find it hard to believe if hes guilty it was just with the 1 girl that kept a photo or somebody else released really there could be more at stake


Yeah, I posted upthread that I wouldn't be surprised if girls/women weren't 'provided' in the gruesome circles he moved in.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 3, 2022)

Weller said:


> Randy Andy as the newspapers here once called him regular was a very very good friend and visitor , user of Epsteins jet and holiday homes it seems for many years I find it hard to believe if hes guilty it was just with the 1 girl that kept a photo or somebody else released really there could be more at stake


I read somewhere once that a lot of them were East European. So perhaps imported through gangs and therefore their silence assured.


----------



## Athos (Jan 3, 2022)

Petcha said:


> So he's not even really bothering to deny this anymore, but relying on various legal loopholes? What an utter shit.


No, he'll deny everything if and when the time comes.   He's just trying to get it thrown out on procedural grounds, first, so that he doesn't have to engage with the substance.  As much as I hope he fails, that's probably the best strategy for him.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 3, 2022)

Will be expensive if not successful though, I presume the US has taxing of costs like the UK does? 

Not that he doesn't have a bob or two.


----------



## tim (Jan 3, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> I read somewhere once that a lot of them were East European. So perhaps imported through gangs and therefore their silence assured.


Nobody's silence is assured in the long-term.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 3, 2022)

tim said:


> Nobody's silence is assured in the long-term.


Fair point.


----------



## Athos (Jan 3, 2022)

two sheds said:


> Will be expensive if not successful though, I presume the US has taxing of costs like the UK does?
> 
> Not that he doesn't have a bob or two


His Mum is We are paying.


----------



## Athos (Jan 3, 2022)

tim said:


> Nobody's silence is assured in the long-term.


Epstein's is.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 3, 2022)

Unless he wrote diaries .... 

from beyond the grave duh duh duh duh


----------



## Ming (Jan 4, 2022)

Just to be absolutely fair and to give Randy Andy a fair crack of the whip (ouch) I’m going to ask a senior GP tomorrow at work if exposure to a stressful environment can lead to a change in the skin’s  thermoregulation response. And when i get the response that that’s impossible i will report back. Regarding the answer we all know to be the case. Because proof is being required by the US legal system. If he gets away with this on the basis he can’t sweat…well should be interesting.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 4, 2022)

There's a list of causes here:









						Anhidrosis (Lack of Sweat): Symptoms, Causes & Treatment
					

Anhidrosis is a condition in which you don’t sweat normally in one or more body areas. Not being able to cool down properly can be dangerous and even life-threatening.




					my.clevelandclinic.org
				




And unless I'm reading it incorrectly, none appear to say "an overdose of adrenaline."


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 4, 2022)

Top work by the Team Sweaty legal eagles paying off as expected once again I see


----------



## Ming (Jan 4, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> There's a list of causes here:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So it is possible. I’m trying to be as fair as possible (so we can totally nail the cunt). I’ll see if i can get the medic to give their opinion on video (not specifically related to any individual obviously). Just related to the condition and its possible causes.


----------



## Sue (Jan 4, 2022)

Ming said:


> So it is possible. I’m trying to be as fair as possible (so we can totally nail the cunt). I’ll see if i can get the medic to give their opinion on video (not specifically related to any individual obviously). Just related to the condition and its possible causes.


Why? We're not nailing anyone for anything and getting a doctor you know to say this on video? Why?


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 4, 2022)

Innit. Does it matter? He’s already been proved a liar about it cos of all those clammy pics.


----------



## Ming (Jan 4, 2022)

Sue said:


> Why? We're not nailing anyone for anything and getting a doctor you know to say this on video? Why?


OK. Maybe not. They probably wouldn't anyway. I suppose my motivation was to get a qualified professional on tape saying a big part of his whole defence was complete bollocks. 
ETA : I am going to ask anyway. Will report back with the inevitable answer.


----------



## dessiato (Jan 4, 2022)

1927 said:


> I wonder how much his lawyers charged the royal nonce to write that crap!


Ours charges £345+vat per hour or part thereof just for work relating to a joint POA/POW so what the nonce's lawyers are charging...


----------



## tim (Jan 4, 2022)

Ming said:


> OK. Maybe not. They probably wouldn't anyway. I suppose my motivation was to get a qualified professional on tape saying a big part of his whole defence was complete bollocks.
> ETA : I am going to ask anyway. Will report back with the inevitable answer.


Somewhere on the John Sweeney podcasts he does exactly this with a professor of endocrinology. The answer is   the claim doesn't hold water anymore than Andrew's pores.


----------



## Ming (Jan 4, 2022)

tim said:


> Somewhere on the John Sweeney podcasts he does exactly this with a professor of endocrinology. The answer is   the claim doesn't hold water anymore than Andrew's pores.


It was always patronizing bollocks.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 4, 2022)

Tramps has always been a den of twats


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 4, 2022)

dessiato said:


> Ours charges £345+vat per hour or part thereof just for work relating to a joint POA/POW so what the nonce's lawyers are charging...


They've found a Charlie and will be screwing Andrew for every penny they can


----------



## dessiato (Jan 4, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> They've found a Charlie and will be screwing Andrew for every penny they can


The problem is that we, the people, are, ultimately, paying for nonce.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 4, 2022)

dessiato said:


> The problem is that we, the people, are, ultimately, paying for nonce.


So much the better, the lawyers reckon, as they can milk the resources of the entire country


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 4, 2022)

two sheds said:


> And bit of a remarkable defence that asking for a puppet is "harassing and seeks confidential and private information and documents"
> 
> "help, help I'm being repressed"


It's a Fluck & Law situation.


----------



## scalyboy (Jan 4, 2022)

On the subject of weird legalese language, this (from the Virginia Roberts/Giuffre & Epstein settlement agreement) took me by surprise:

_2. General Release (pages 2-3):
"Hereby remise, release, acquit, satisfy, and forever discharge the said Second Parties and any other person or entity who could have been included as a potential defendant ('Other Potential Defendants') from all, and all manner of, action and actions of Virginia Roberts [...] for compensatory or punitive damages that First Parties [...] ever had or now have [...] against Jeffrey Epstein [...] *from the beginning of the world* to the day of this release."_

_"from the beginning of the world"_?! 
WTF. 

It's like a mashup of Derrida (gone berserk on cheap red wine and Adderall) and the Old Testament.


----------



## seeformiles (Jan 4, 2022)

scalyboy said:


> On the subject of weird legalese language, this (from the Virginia Roberts/Giuffre & Epstein settlement agreement) took me by surprise:
> 
> _2. General Release (pages 2-3):
> "Hereby remise, release, acquit, satisfy, and forever discharge the said Second Parties and any other person or entity who could have been included as a potential defendant ('Other Potential Defendants') from all, and all manner of, action and actions of Virginia Roberts [...] for compensatory or punitive damages that First Parties [...] ever had or now have [...] against Jeffrey Epstein [...] *from the beginning of the world* to the day of this release."_
> ...



Perhaps they could also add “From beyond the grave” just to cover all eventualities?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 4, 2022)

have any legal people given an opinion on whether this agreement is likely to help the duke of nonce?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 4, 2022)

Kaka Tim said:


> have any legal people given an opinion on whether this agreement is likely to help the duke of nonce?


The only opinion that matters is the judge's and we'll doubtless have that soon enough


----------



## 1927 (Jan 4, 2022)

Kaka Tim said:


> have any legal people given an opinion on whether this agreement is likely to help the duke of nonce?


Well seeing as the judge has know the details for months and hasn’t kicked it out of court yet I think it’s unlikely to get him anywhere!


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 4, 2022)

Kaka Tim said:


> have any legal people given an opinion on whether this agreement is likely to help the duke of nonce?


There was a US lawyer on R4 this morning suggesting that the release may be too widely drawn to be enforceable but that it's up to the judge. Of course.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 4, 2022)

1927 said:


> Well seeing as the judge has know the details for months and hasn’t kicked it out of court yet I think it’s unlikely to get him anywhere!


Andrew's lawyers weren't previously applying to have the case dismissed on these grounds and until such an application made the judge can't rule on it


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 4, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> There was a US lawyer on R4 this morning suggesting that the release may be too widely drawn to be enforceable but that it's up to the judge. Of course.


Here at 1hr 50 








						Today - 04/01/2022 - BBC Sounds
					

News and current affairs, including Sports Desk, Weather and Thought for the Day.




					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## Diamond (Jan 4, 2022)

Kaka Tim said:


> have any legal people given an opinion on whether this agreement is likely to help the duke of nonce?



My relatively non-expert view is that the settlement is intended to protect him and will do so.

Some interesting commentary here:


----------



## 1927 (Jan 4, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> Andrew's lawyers weren't previously applying to have the case dismissed on these grounds and until such an application made the judge can't rule on it


Surely they’ve been citing the arrangement with Epstein for months tho. Hasn’t there already been a hearing to decide if it was relevant back in November?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 4, 2022)

If this doesn't work for His Royal Nonceness then things are pretty bad for Dershowitz too, in that it, A: might not cover him as well, B: it is likely that the Harvard Professor of law wrote the fucking agreement in the first place.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 4, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> If this doesn't work for His Royal Nonceness then things are pretty bad for Dershowitz too, in that it, A: might not cover him as well, B: it is likely that the Harvard Professor of law wrote the fucking agreement in the first place.


Anyone who has read finklestein's chutzpah knows dershowitz is a shot with irons in many fires


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 4, 2022)

1927 said:


> Surely they’ve been citing the arrangement with Epstein for months tho. Hasn’t there already been a hearing to decide if it was relevant back in November?


Then if it works for Andrew the case should have been thrown out then


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 4, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> Anyone who has read finklestein's chutzpah knows dershowitz is a shot with irons in many fires


Dershowitz is indeed on the side of the demons on many accounts.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 4, 2022)

Diamond said:


> My relatively non-expert view is that the settlement is intended to protect him and will do so.
> 
> Some interesting commentary here:



That commentary seems to lead to the opposite conclusion to you.  In particular:



This is saying that the malfeasance for which jointly liable codefendants are now released is procurement of a minor for sex.  The nonce is being sued for something different, ie sex with a minor.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 4, 2022)

We wouldn't know, would we, whether Windsor's lawyers have been desperately trying to settle meanwhile and all this bigging up of the release was pressure to reach settlement. Yet it's probs not worth the paper it's written on except for Epstein himself and Giuffre's own payoff, which may already be exhausted by now in legal fees.
I can't see Giuffre yielding until costs become unbearable, and she may be reaching that point...  Or are they on a no win no fee basis? They probably are. 

Popcorn time


----------



## MickiQ (Jan 4, 2022)

We any idea what time the hearing is set for? It's only 7am in NY at the moment so I suspect His Honor is still having his brekkie.


----------



## Athos (Jan 4, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> If this doesn't work for His Royal Nonceness then things are pretty bad for Dershowitz too, in that it, A: might not cover him as well, B: it is likely that the Harvard Professor of law wrote the fucking agreement in the first place.


She's not pursuing Dershowitz on similar grounds; her case against him is for libel.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 4, 2022)

Athos said:


> It already worked for Dershowitz; she abandoned the claim because of it.


Was she using the same lawyers as now, do you know?


----------



## Diamond (Jan 4, 2022)

kabbes said:


> That commentary seems to lead to the opposite conclusion to you.  In particular:
> 
> 
> 
> This is saying that the malfeasance for which jointly liable codefendants are now released is procurement of a minor for sex.  The nonce is being sued for something different, ie sex with a minor.




Not sure, I didn't write it, but I think you are misreading the tweet.

The contractual arguments are sufficiently strong for him IMV - the joint tortfeasor stuff looks actually to be of more assistance rather than less as well.  The idea that these people weren't well advised and wouldn't have a very strong legal position is also a bit silly - it's the Royals/establishment.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 4, 2022)

Diamond said:


> Not sure, I didn't write it, but I think you are misreading the tweet.
> 
> The contractual arguments are sufficiently strong for him IMV - the joint tortfeasor stuff looks actually to be of more assistance rather than less as well.  The idea that these people weren't well advised and wouldn't have a very strong legal position is also a bit silly - it's the Royals/establishment.


oh yeh it's the royals / establishment so they must have a strong position. doesn't follow. just look at the number of times successive governments have been found wanting in the courts: and you'd think if anyone kept to the law it'd be people responsible for making it.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jan 4, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> Dershowitz is indeed on the side of the demons on many accounts.



Indeed, the guy is one of the lowest forms of scum on the planet - a sick, intensely evil freak. Good article on him in the Newyorker a few years back. What really shines the through the piece is that Dershowitz' extreme misogyny predates his embroilment in Epstein's child rape cult by many decades.  Victim-shaming, anti-feminism and defending sexual predators has been a long staple of his. 









						Alan Dershowitz, Devil’s Advocate
					

The noted lawyer’s long, controversial career—and the accusations against him.




					www.newyorker.com


----------



## Athos (Jan 4, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> Was she using the same lawyers as now, do you know?


EDIT: Some of the same.


----------



## xenon (Jan 4, 2022)

Legalise is such unreadable drivel.
e.g.
15. Defendant objects to the definition of the terms “Jeffrey Epstein” and “Epstein” as overbroad, vague and ambiguous to the extent it incorporates persons
and entities of which Defendant has no knowledge. For purposes of responding to these Requests, Defendant understands “Jeffrey Epstein” and “Epstein” to
mean Jeffrey Epstein.

How can references to Jeffrey Epstein” and “Epstein” be meaning other people, vague, over broad. FFS.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 4, 2022)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Indeed, the guy is one of the lowest forms of scum on the planet - a sick, intensely evil freak. Good article on him in the Newyorker a few years back. What really shines the through the piece is that Dershowitz' extreme misogyny predates his embroilment in Epstein's child rape cult by many decades.  Victim-shaming, anti-feminism and defending sexual predators has been a long staple of his.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That's a long read, but worth it. This early passage in particular is interesting with reference to his own moral compass:



> In a 1997 op-ed in the Los Angeles _Times_, he argued against statutory-rape laws, writing, “There must be criminal sanctions against sex with very young children, but it is doubtful whether such sanctions should apply to teenagers above the age of puberty, since voluntary sex is so common in their age group.” He suggested that fifteen was a reasonable age of consent, no matter how old the partner was. He has also argued against punishing men who hire prostitutes. In a 1985 article, in the Gainesville _Sun_, Dershowitz proposed that a john “who occasionally seeks to taste the forbidden fruit of sex for hire” should not be arrested. The nonprofit executive recalled his discussing the idea in class: “He said, ‘Prostitutes know what they’re doing—they should be prosecuted. But you shouldn’t ruin the john’s life over that.’



The article also sets out Giuffre's history, how she sought to put the Epstein past behind her and why she couldn't when five years later they tracked her down to Australia.


----------



## Athos (Jan 4, 2022)

xenon said:


> Legalise is such unreadable drivel.
> e.g.
> 15. Defendant objects to the definition of the terms “Jeffrey Epstein” and “Epstein” as overbroad, vague and ambiguous to the extent it incorporates persons
> and entities of which Defendant has no knowledge. For purposes of responding to these Requests, Defendant understands “Jeffrey Epstein” and “Epstein” to
> ...



He's objecting to how she defined those terms for the purposes of her requests.  Without knowing how she's defined then, it's hard to say whether or not the objection is reasonable.  If for example, she sought to define them as, say, including "all family, friends, associates, and staff, as well as associated businesses" that could be too wide.


----------



## Athos (Jan 4, 2022)

Today's hearing at 1500.  Anyone can listen by dialing in on +1 409-207-6997. The teleconference access code is 1532656#.  But you *must not record or broadcast*.


----------



## steveseagull (Jan 4, 2022)

Athos said:


> Today's hearing at 1500.  Anyone can listen by dialing in on +1 409-207-6997. The teleconference access code is 1532656#.  But you *must not record or broadcast*.


3pm our time?


----------



## MickiQ (Jan 4, 2022)

Athos said:


> Today's hearing at 1500.  Anyone can listen by dialing in on +1 409-207-6997. The teleconference access code is 1532656#.  But you *must not record or broadcast*.


The only question I have is "Will There Be a Trial?", I'm sure someone will announce it sooner or later, 15.00 there is 20.00 here.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 4, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> That's a long read, but worth it. This early passage in particular is interesting with reference to his own moral compass:
> 
> 
> 
> The article also sets out Giuffre's history, how she sought to put the Epstein past behind her and why she couldn't when five years later they tracked her down to Australia.


It’s too long for me to read on a screen. I started but didn’t even get as far as the passage you quote.


----------



## xenon (Jan 4, 2022)

Athos said:


> He's objecting to how she defined those terms for the purposes of her requests.  Without knowing how she's defined then, it's hard to say whether or not the objection is reasonable.  If for example, she sought to define them as, say, including "all family, friends, associates, and staff, as well as associated businesses" that could be too wide.



But it doesn't read like that is my point. It looks like nonsense. If it said “Jeffrey Epsteidn and all other parties, that would  make sense. 

The logic of how that #15 is written is he objects to “Jeffrey Epstein” and “Epstein” as being too wide. When by any normal persons reading, that phrase refers to one person.


----------



## xenon (Jan 4, 2022)

But I haven't read the wwhole document and unlikely too TBH maybe you need that.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 4, 2022)

xenon said:


> But it doesn't read like that is my point. It looks like nonsense. If it said “Jeffrey Epsteidn and all other parties, that would  make sense.
> 
> The logic of how that #15 is written is he objects to “Jeffrey Epstein” and “Epstein” as being too wide. When by any normal persons reading, that phrase refers to one person.


No, I think you (and plenty of others in this thread) are misunderstanding.

There is some _other_ document (issued by Guifre’s side) that has defined the phrase “Jeffrey Epstein” for some purpose. We don’t know what that other document says, but from context we know that it has defined “Jeffrey Epstein” in a way that includes more than just the man himself. For example, maybe it has defined “Jeffrey Epstein” to mean the man AND any business he ever set up.

So in THIS document, the lawyers are objecting that the definition of “Jeffrey Epstein” in the OTHER document is unfair. They are saying that “Jeffrey Epstein” should refer only to the man himself.

TL;DR: The point you are making means you actually agree with the nonce’s lawyers.


----------



## Athos (Jan 4, 2022)

kabbes said:


> No, I think you (and plenty of others in this thread) are misunderstanding.
> 
> There is some _other_ document (issued by Guifre’s side) that has defined the phrase “Jeffrey Epstein” for some purpose. We don’t know what that other document says, but from context we know that it has defined “Jeffrey Epstein” in a way that includes more than just the man himself. For example, maybe it has defined “Jeffrey Epstein” to mean the man AND any business he ever set up.
> 
> ...


This.


----------



## Athos (Jan 4, 2022)

MickiQ said:


> The only question I have is "Will There Be a Trial?", I'm sure someone will announce it sooner or later, 15.00 there is 20.00 here.


No, 1500 here.


----------



## MickiQ (Jan 4, 2022)

Athos said:


> No, 1500 here.


OK expect to here soon then eh?


----------



## Athos (Jan 4, 2022)

MickiQ said:


> OK expect to here soon then eh?


I don't know if the judge will make a decision today, or just hear the arguments, and take time to consider.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 4, 2022)




----------



## xenon (Jan 4, 2022)

kabbes said:


> No, I think you (and plenty of others in this thread) are misunderstanding.
> 
> There is some _other_ document (issued by Guifre’s side) that has defined the phrase “Jeffrey Epstein” for some purpose. We don’t know what that other document says, but from context we know that it has defined “Jeffrey Epstein” in a way that includes more than just the man himself. For example, maybe it has defined “Jeffrey Epstein” to mean the man AND any business he ever set up.
> 
> ...



But aren't they also arguing that the agreement covers Andrew. SO on one hand objecting to what might be a very wide interpretation of the usage, Epstein
And on the other saying the agreement which presumably doesn't explicitly name Prince Andrew, does in fact cover him.

Fucking lawyers.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 4, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> View attachment 304487


bit liberal there, danny


----------



## Athos (Jan 4, 2022)

xenon said:


> But aren't they also arguing that the agreement covers Andrew. SO on one hand objecting to what might be a very wide interpretation of the usage, Epstein
> And on the other saying the agreement which presumably doesn't explicitly name Prince Andrew, does in fact cover him.
> 
> Fucking lawyers.



Is like saying it's not appropriate - for the purposes of trying to find things posted on the internet by Xenon - to define Xenon as 'Xenon and and their associates', whilst, at the same time, arguing that Xenon is captured within a group defined as 'people who post on Urban75'; there is no inherent contradiction.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 4, 2022)

Listening to it, interesting, the judge doesn't seem too friendly with Nonce's brief, the one with the hairdo...


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 4, 2022)

Now arguing that she filed it too late whilst acknowledging it was within the time limit.


----------



## steveseagull (Jan 4, 2022)

Coverage from Simon Marks


----------



## Athos (Jan 4, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Now arguing that she filed it too late whilst acknowledging it was within the time limit.


Arguing that the Governor shouldn't have extended the limitation period for any victims of sexual abuse isn't a good look.


----------



## Athos (Jan 4, 2022)

Bois coming across as a better advocate than Brettler.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 4, 2022)

Athos said:


> Arguing that the Governor shouldn't have extended the limitation period for any victims of sexual abuse isn't a good look.


No sweat said the duke


----------



## friedaweed (Jan 4, 2022)

I'll bet he's sweating now.


----------



## Athos (Jan 4, 2022)

friedaweed said:


> I'll bet he's sweating now.


He will be if he's listening to this.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 4, 2022)

Athos said:


> He will be if he's listening to this.


The duke's aides are scouring Windsor for brown trousers and handkerchiefs as Andrew loses his cool


----------



## Athos (Jan 4, 2022)

The Judge now putting forward arguments in Giuffre's favour that weren't even advanced by her lawyers!


----------



## friedaweed (Jan 4, 2022)

Probably getting spankies from Lizzy bent over a stuffed corgi right now with Charles counting out the lashes. 

"Fourteen Mommy, Fifteen mommy"


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 4, 2022)

Athos said:


> The Judge now putting forward arguments in Giuffre's favour that weren't even advanced by her lawyers!



Will that be grounds for appeal?

He wants to be called HRH the Potential Defendant, Duke of York but I reckon he's already earned the title HRH The Disgraced Duke of York.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 4, 2022)

friedaweed said:


> Probably getting spankies from Lizzy bent over a stuffed corgi right now with Charles counting out the lashes.
> 
> "Fourteen Mommy, Fifteen mommy"


Prince Charles has a servant to do this as he can't count beyond 1, his place in the list of succession to the throne


----------



## steveseagull (Jan 4, 2022)

It's all falling apart for the (un)sweaty one


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 4, 2022)

steveseagull said:


> It's all falling apart for the (un)sweaty one



The judge says once more, this time with feeling


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 4, 2022)

Certainly looking un-good for the sweatless wonder.


----------



## Athos (Jan 4, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> Will that be grounds for appeal?
> 
> He wants to be called HRH the Potential Defendant, Duke of York but I reckon he's already earned the title HRH The Disgraced Duke of York.


I don't think so; think he's allowed to interpret it.


----------



## friedaweed (Jan 4, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> Will that be grounds for appeal?
> 
> He wants to be called HRH the Potential Defendant, Duke of York but I reckon he's already earned the title HRH The Disgraced Duke of York.


They could use his Latin name Rex Diaphoresis


----------



## Athos (Jan 4, 2022)

Judge getting frustrated with Brettler.  This only going one way, now.


----------



## steveseagull (Jan 4, 2022)




----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 4, 2022)

Arguments over, decision to me made 'pretty soon'


----------



## Athos (Jan 4, 2022)

Judge says he'll make a decision pretty soon, but won't say when. No stay of proceedings on the meantime; discovery to continue.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jan 4, 2022)

Bloody loving this


----------



## steveseagull (Jan 4, 2022)




----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 4, 2022)

steveseagull said:


>



I thought the royal nonce said that with the trusty sword of truth and shield of fair play he would clear his name, or words to that effect. But now it looks like he's unable to do that so scrabbling round the barrel for any old shit to try and weasel his way out of this


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jan 4, 2022)

Breaking news from the Duke's doctor: turns out his sweat glands are fully functional again.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 4, 2022)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Breaking news from the Duke's doctor: turns out his sweat glands are fully functional again.


A miracle!


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 4, 2022)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Breaking news from the Duke's doctor: turns out his sweat glands are fully functional again.


Is that comedy or did they really?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 4, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> Is that comedy or did they really?


Yes


----------



## TopCat (Jan 4, 2022)

"Andrew B Brettler, the lawyer for the Duke of York, told Judge Lewis A Kaplan during a virtual hearing on Tuesday that a potential defendant was "someone who was not named as a defendant but _could have been_".

He said that a potential defendant would be someone Ms Giuffre knew that she had "claims against at the time that she filed the lawsuit" in 2009.
Judge Kaplan said "potential" was a phrase that neither he nor Mr Brettler could "find any meaning at all" in.

Mr Brettler told Judge Kaplan that Prince Andrew "could have been sued" but was not, and added that he wanted Ms Giuffre to "lock herself into a story now" and provide further and more precise details of her allegations.

Judge Kaplan responded to say that was not a requirement at this stage of the process and "just isn't the law".

Mr Brettler concluded by saying the case should "absolutely be dismissed"."


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 4, 2022)

TopCat said:


> "Andrew B Brettler, the lawyer for the Duke of York, told Judge Lewis A Kaplan during a virtual hearing on Tuesday that a potential defendant was "someone who was not named as a defendant but _could have been_".
> 
> He said that a potential defendant would be someone Ms Giuffre knew that she had "claims against at the time that she filed the lawsuit" in 2009.
> Judge Kaplan said "potential" was a phrase that neither he nor Mr Brettler could "find any meaning at all" in.
> ...


not really a ringing endorsement of the prince's innocence


----------



## 1927 (Jan 4, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> Then if it works for Andrew the case should have been thrown out then


I would have thought so!


----------



## Sue (Jan 4, 2022)

TopCat said:


> "Andrew B Brettler, the lawyer for the Duke of York, told Judge Lewis A Kaplan during a virtual hearing on Tuesday that a potential defendant was "someone who was not named as a defendant but _could have been_".
> 
> He said that a potential defendant would be someone Ms Giuffre knew that she had "claims against at the time that she filed the lawsuit" in 2009.
> Judge Kaplan said "potential" was a phrase that neither he nor Mr Brettler could "find any meaning at all" in.
> ...


All gone a bit Giuliani-esque.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Jan 4, 2022)




----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jan 4, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> Is that comedy or did they really?



I fear the answer is none of the above.


----------



## existentialist (Jan 4, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> Confess I haven't looked at Exhibit B yet but if the terms 'Ghislaine Maxwell' and 'Maxwell' are 'overbroad', what the hell is the term 'Other Potential Defendants'?


I'm going to try and get a tenner at 500/1 on him using a FOTL defence.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jan 4, 2022)

Mark Steel:


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 4, 2022)

existentialist said:


> I'm going to try and get a tenner at 500/1 on him using a FOTL defence.


Fellowship Of The …?


----------



## RainbowTown (Jan 4, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> Fellowship Of The …?



 Licentious.


----------



## existentialist (Jan 4, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> Fellowship Of The …?


Freeman on the Land


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 4, 2022)

existentialist said:


> Freeman on the Land


Of course.


----------



## bemused (Jan 4, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> not really a ringing endorsement of the prince's innocence


We must be nearing the mummy's money pay off stage.


----------



## belboid (Jan 4, 2022)

existentialist said:


> I'm going to try and get a tenner at 500/1 on him using a FOTL defence.


He’s already played the royal card, bit rich for him to try and claim anything Magna Carta based, shorely.


----------



## scalyboy (Jan 4, 2022)

existentialist said:


> I'm going to try and get a tenner at 500/1 on him using a FOTL defence.


"Your Honour, my client is a sovereign citizen and, as such, does not identify with the legal entity known as 'Sweaty Nonce'"


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 4, 2022)

bemused said:


> We must be nearing the mummy's money pay off stage.


i think matters have gone beyond that now, blood has been sensed let alone the cold perspiration of fear from the former naval officer.


----------



## bemused (Jan 4, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> i think matters have gone beyond that now, blood has been sensed let alone the cold perspiration of fear from the former naval officer.


I'd like to be a fly on that wall.


Hi Mum, this woman is saying I fucked her when she was 17 and sex trafficked
Did you?
I can't remember I was fucking a lot of chicks then.
How much do you need to pay her off, we can dip into the Number 10 wallpaper fund
about $3,000,000
Three Fergies then

He's going to pay her off, we'll never know the number, he'll end up living in a castle chilling. 

When do we get a vote for an elected head of state.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 4, 2022)

bemused said:


> I'd like to be a fly on that wall.
> 
> 
> Hi Mum, this woman is saying I fucked her when she was 17 and sex trafficked
> ...


I reckon it would take a fair bit more than $3m to call this off now. And if it gets to a jury trial, won't they decide the level of damages? Could be a staggering amount if so.


----------



## Duncan2 (Jan 4, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> I reckon it would take a fair bit more than $3m to call this off now. And if it gets to a jury trial, won't they decide the level of damages? Could be a staggering amount if so.


But thats awful-our Queen could lose her place on Forbes' list


----------



## bemused (Jan 4, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> I reckon it would take a fair bit more than $3m to call this off now. And if it gets to a jury trial, won't they decide the level of damages? Could be a staggering amount if so.


I can't see him not settling out of court, he probably already has a number.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 4, 2022)

bemused said:


> I can't see him not settling out of court, he probably already has a number.


He can't settle if she doesn't want to, can he?

eta: it's a gamble for her of course in case she loses the case and gets stung for his lawyers' fees as well. so she may be advised to settle if her lawyers anyway whether her lawyers are acting pro bono or no win no fee.


----------



## bemused (Jan 4, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> He can't settle if she doesn't want to, can he?


She's suing him, she wants him to pay her, getting paid without a trial is less expensive for her and a sure thing.


----------



## existentialist (Jan 4, 2022)

bemused said:


> She's suing him, she wants him to pay her, getting paid without a trial is less expensive for her and a sure thing.


It depends. It might not be about the money any more. And even if it is, think of the book deal she'd score if she prevailed...

ETA: for a lot of victims of abuse/exploitation, what matters the most is having your story heard and acknowledged.


----------



## Calamity1971 (Jan 4, 2022)

bemused said:


> She's suing him, she wants him to pay her, getting paid without a trial is less expensive for her and a sure thing.


Legal bod on earlier today in the state's said she is a multi millionaire and it's not about the Dosh it's about getting justice. Think it was Lisa Brown?


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 4, 2022)

existentialist said:


> It depends. It might not be about the money any more. And even if it is, think of the book deal she'd score if she prevailed...


No, it's probably not about the money. The trouble is that the only way to get a semblance of justice in this sort of case is through the civil courts, so it will be a monetary claim in principle. But she's on a campaign now, I reckon.


----------



## Numbers (Jan 4, 2022)

Duncan2 said:


> But thats awful-our Queen could lose her place on Forbes' list


As long as we don’t lose our Jubilee day in June I’m cool with that.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 4, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> I reckon it would take a fair bit more than $3m to call this off now. And if it gets to a jury trial, won't they decide the level of damages? Could be a staggering amount if so.


an arm and a leg perhaps


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 4, 2022)

bemused said:


> She's suing him, she wants him to pay her, getting paid without a trial is less expensive for her and a sure thing.


i'm sure she's on a no win no fee arrangement with her lawyers. it's possible the defence lawyers are on the same (if andrew's paying them per hour atm he really ought to look for better representation)


----------



## TopCat (Jan 4, 2022)

existentialist said:


> It depends. It might not be about the money any more. And even if it is, think of the book deal she'd score if she prevailed...
> 
> ETA: for a lot of victims of abuse/exploitation, what matters the most is having your story heard and acknowledged.


Not sure for me. I wanted revenge myself.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 4, 2022)

bemused said:


> She's suing him, she wants him to pay her, getting paid without a trial is less expensive for her and a sure thing.


ugly


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 4, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> i'm sure she's on a no win no fee arrangement with her lawyers. it's possible the defence lawyers are on the same (if andrew's paying them per hour atm he really ought to look for better representation)




Brettler doesn’t do no win, no fee for anyone.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 4, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Brettler doesn’t do no win, no fee for anyone.


it'll just be no win then


----------



## MickiQ (Jan 4, 2022)

The trouble with paying her off is that no matter what any agreement says, people are going to point and say "Look he must be a nonce (sweaty or otherwise) because he paid her off to keep it from coming out in court'  He is simply too high profile an individual to hope people will just forget about it. He needs to have his day in court and clear his name to have any real chance of his old life back. Trouble is it's glaringly obvious he doesn't want his day in court.
As an extra bonus this has also probably seriously fucked the Sussexes chances of making it in Hollywood. Every chat show that Harry ever goes someone is bound to ask him about his uncle.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 4, 2022)

MickiQ said:


> The trouble with paying her off is that no matter what any agreement says, people are going to point and say "Look he must be a nonce (sweaty or otherwise) because he paid her off to keep it from coming out in court'  He is simply too high profile an individual to hope people will just forget about it. He needs to have his day in court and clear his name to have any real chance of his old life back. Trouble is it's glaringly obvious he doesn't want his day in court.
> As an extra bonus this has also probably seriously fucked the Sussexes chances of making it in Hollywood. Every chat show that Harry ever goes someone is bound to ask him about his uncle.


he said he could prove his innocence. only now he's trying to get off on technicalities and almost certainly failing dismally. and as an added bonus he's seizing the news agenda from the rest of the windsor cabal. let's hope judgement's handed down on the queen's big day.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 4, 2022)

MickiQ said:


> The trouble with paying her off is that no matter what any agreement says, people are going to point and say "Look he must be a nonce (sweaty or otherwise) because he paid her off to keep it from coming out in court'  He is simply too high profile an individual to hope people will just forget about it. He needs to have his day in court and clear his name to have any real chance of his old life back. Trouble is it's glaringly obvious he doesn't want his day in court.
> As an extra bonus this has also probably seriously fucked the Sussexes chances of making it in Hollywood. Every chat show that Harry ever goes someone is bound to ask him about his uncle.


which one, the nonce, the one who drove his wife to attempt suicide or the one everyone forgets about?


----------



## Athos (Jan 4, 2022)

MickiQ said:


> The trouble with paying her off is that no matter what any agreement says, people are going to point and say "Look he must be a nonce (sweaty or otherwise) because he paid her off to keep it from coming out in court'  He is simply too high profile an individual to hope people will just forget about it. He needs to have his day in court and clear his name to have any real chance of his old life back. Trouble is it's glaringly obvious he doesn't want his day in court.
> As an extra bonus this has also probably seriously fucked the Sussexes chances of making it in Hollywood. Every chat show that Harry ever goes someone is bound to ask him about his uncle.


Even if it goes to a trial and he wins, many won't belive he didn't do it.  So, he might prefer to avoid the risk of a judicial finding of noncery, and the associated costs, by trying to settle sooner rather thna later (assuming his procedural challanges fail).


----------



## MickiQ (Jan 4, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> which one, the nonce, the one who drove his wife to attempt suicide or the one everyone forgets about?


Come to think of it I don't know if Hewitt has any siblings.


----------



## Flavour (Jan 4, 2022)

The world demands a trial and I don't think giuffre, her lawyers and the yank courts are going to disappoint. Its going to be epic. I want Andrew to call character witnesses, I want long discussions of his sweat glands, I want surprise guest witnesses for the prosecution who don't even add much, just ex squaddies who testify he was a knob in the Falklands and did fuck all


----------



## existentialist (Jan 4, 2022)

TopCat said:


> Not sure for me. I wanted revenge myself.


Yeah, that was a massive generalisation on my part, TBF. The response of victims of abuse will be as diverse as the victims themselves. And it may be that the victims that I come into contact with are a self-selecting group who are more likely to favour a particular goal. And it wasn't revenge in my case...but I completely appreciate the desire of some victims to assert something other than powerlessness upon their persecutor.

Whatever, the one thing that doesn't change is that this - alleged - perpetrator is going to enormous, and convoluted, lengths to avoid even any semblance of due process...and that's probably common to most child sex abusers.


----------



## existentialist (Jan 4, 2022)

bemused said:


> She's suing him, she wants him to pay her, getting paid without a trial is less expensive for her and a sure thing.


I don't see how you can know that.


----------



## existentialist (Jan 4, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> i'm sure she's on a no win no fee arrangement with her lawyers. it's possible the defence lawyers are on the same (if andrew's paying them per hour atm he really ought to look for better representation)


Andrew isn't paying them, though, is he? And they don't strike me like the kind of legal firm that represents the kind of clients who want to do cases on a contingency basis


----------



## existentialist (Jan 4, 2022)

Flavour said:


> The world demands a trial and I don't think giuffre, her lawyers and the yank courts are going to disappoint. Its going to be epic. I want Andrew to call character witnesses, I want long discussions of his sweat glands, I want surprise guest witnesses for the prosecution who don't even add much, just ex squaddies who testify he was a knob in the Falklands and did fuck all


I reckon he'll fold way before then. Or have some kind of accident. Does he still enjoy flying?


----------



## Athos (Jan 4, 2022)

Flavour said:


> The world demands a trial and I don't think giuffre, her lawyers and the yank courts are going to disappoint. Its going to be epic. I want Andrew to call character witnesses, I want long discussions of his sweat glands, I want surprise guest witnesses for the prosecution who don't even add much, just ex squaddies who testify he was a knob in the Falklands and did fuck all


If she won't agree to settle, he could take the bold course of declining to appear (or being represented) at the hearing on some spurious grounds, just to avoid the possibility of an adverse finding after a contested trial.  It'd mean judgement against him, but he'd have to hope that it wouldn't be enforceable against any assets in the UK.


----------



## existentialist (Jan 4, 2022)

Athos said:


> If she won't agree to settle, he could take the bold course of declining to appear (or being represented) at the hearing on some spurious grounds, just to avoid the possibility of an adverse finding after a contested trial.  It'd mean judgement against him, but he'd have to hope that it wouldn't be enforceable against any assets in the UK.


But it would mean an implicit acknowledgement of some degree of guilt, even though I think you're probably right as far as what he might do is concerned.


----------



## Athos (Jan 4, 2022)

existentialist said:


> But it would mean an implicit acknowledgement of some degree of guilt, even though I think you're probably right as far as what he might do is concerned.


Not necessarily; he could say he's innocent, but that he can't get a fair trial, so refuses to engage with the process.


----------



## existentialist (Jan 4, 2022)

Athos said:


> Not necessarily; he could say he's innocent, but that he can't get a fair trial, so refuses to engage with the process.


And how will that go down in the court of public opinion, do you think? Given that his sweatlessness and fondness for Pizza Express is already mainstream comedy and media fodder?


----------



## Athos (Jan 4, 2022)

existentialist said:


> And how will that go down in the court of public opinion, do you think? Given that his sweatlessness and fondness for Pizza Express is already mainstream comedy and media fodder?


People will think he's guilty.  But that's not the "implicit acknowledgement" of guilt to which you referred.


----------



## elbows (Jan 4, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> Re puppets:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Terrible stuff, though sadly not surprising.

It seems to be getting a bit harder to find clips on youtube from the original Spitting Image that involve Andrew than it used to be.

I did find one of the ones I could find in the past on youtube, but using twitter instead. But there used to be at least one other on youtube and I cant find it these days.


----------



## existentialist (Jan 4, 2022)

Athos said:


> Not necessarily; he could say he's innocent, but that he can't get a fair trial, so refuses to engage with the process.


He's already being openly laughed at about his sweatlessness and fondness for the Woking branch of Pizza Express. It'd be open season on him, and already is to a degree in mainstream media...



Athos said:


> People with think he's guilty.  But that's not the "implicit acknowledgement" of guilt to which you referred.


So...the sweatygate stories and the Pizza Express stories, already staples of even quite mainstream news and comedy, become weaponised to "he abused a woman under the age of consent" stories.

I can't see him bringing a successful libel action...can you?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 4, 2022)

Flavour said:


> The world demands a trial and I don't think giuffre, her lawyers and the yank courts are going to disappoint. Its going to be epic. I want Andrew to call character witnesses, I want long discussions of his sweat glands, I want surprise guest witnesses for the prosecution who don't even add much, just ex squaddies who testify he was a knob in the Falklands and did fuck all


Sasaferrato


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 4, 2022)

existentialist said:


> I reckon he'll fold way before then. Or have some kind of accident. Does he still enjoy flying?


his next flight might involve a hard landing


----------



## existentialist (Jan 4, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> his next flight might be a one-way trip


The number of landings might end up being one fewer than the number of take-offs


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 4, 2022)

existentialist said:


> He's already being openly laughed at about his sweatlessness and fondness for the Woking branch of Pizza Express. It'd be open season on him, and already is to a degree in mainstream media...
> 
> 
> So...the sweatygate stories and the Pizza Express stories, already staples of even quite mainstream news and comedy, become weaponised to "he abused a woman under the age of consent" stories.
> ...


he has no reputation to damage


----------



## Athos (Jan 4, 2022)

existentialist said:


> He's already being openly laughed at about his sweatlessness and fondness for the Woking branch of Pizza Express. It'd be open season on him, and already is to a degree in mainstream media
> 
> So...the sweatygate stories and the Pizza Express stories, already staples of even quite mainstream news and comedy, become weaponised to "he abused a woman under the age of consent" stories.
> 
> I can't see him bringing a successful libel action...can you?


No.  All of that is true.  And I've never argued otherwise.  My point was that simply refusing to engage wouldn't necessarily amount to an acknowledgement of guilt, as you suggested.


----------



## existentialist (Jan 4, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> he has no reputation to damage


It's quite possible that he's delusional enough to _think_ he has. A different refuge of the scoundrel...


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 4, 2022)

existentialist said:


> It's quite possible that he's delusional enough to _think_ he has. A different refuge of the scoundrel...


the last refuge of this scoundrel


----------



## existentialist (Jan 4, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> the last refuge of this scoundrel
> View attachment 304552


At this rate, those are going to end up being very porky penguins.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 4, 2022)

existentialist said:


> At this rate, those are going to end up being very porky penguins.


don't forget the penguins of the british antarctic territory, plenty of penguins for him to go around


----------



## Sasaferrato (Jan 4, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> Sasaferrato


I've said all I have to say on this. To reiterate, he has not been convicted of anything _at this time._ Guilty of abominable behaviour? Yes. Guilty as testified by the witnesses? Yes. Guilty of any offence within the UK? I don't know.

I do think he should relinquish his military posts, pro tem. In the unlikely event of ever being publicly accepted again, they can be restored. He won't go to prison, I doubt if he will ever stand in a court. He won't ever be in the US again of course.

What an absolutely dreadful situation all round. I should think the only thing worse than being abused is seeing your abuser walk free, and seeming untouchable.

I am a monarchist, no surprise, but I do feel that Andrew has irreparably damaged the institution: yes I know, many of you would like to see it go, your view, as valid as mine; for the first time ever, if there was a plebiscite, I don't know how I would vote.

Thread is now on ignore.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 4, 2022)

Athos said:


> If she won't agree to settle, he could take the bold course of declining to appear (or being represented) at the hearing on some spurious grounds, just to avoid the possibility of an adverse finding after a contested trial.  It'd mean judgement against him, but he'd have to hope that it wouldn't be enforceable against any assets in the UK.




Have heard in the dim and distant that it would be a debt and therefore enforceable in the UK. Although they have been laying the groundwork of no assets; no discernible income, lives in one of mummy's houses, free motor from Nonce Rover. What dough he does have stashed away has come in envelopes from despots and that. Perhaps the Swiss chalet..?


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 4, 2022)

I've just seen a Graun article which quotes Jeanne Christensen, a lawyer expert in this sort of case, who reckoned Andrew was almost certainly not covered by the 2009 agreement.  



> For a New York attorney [...] it was hard to fathom why the Giuffre-Prince Andrew lawsuit had not been settled.
> “I can’t believe they haven’t gotten rid of it already. I don’t get it, but then we don’t have a monarchy. It’s a head-scratcher that it’s ongoing to the degree that it is.”



That got me thinking. It's possible they haven't even attempted to settle. HWCS acts as if he's convinced of his blamelessness, and possibly even believes his own version by now. And the Family is famously mean. They won't pay a penny more than they have to for anything.


----------



## Duncan2 (Jan 4, 2022)

Way things are going he'll be lucky to get a complimentary e-scooter.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jan 4, 2022)

Sasaferrato said:


> I've said all I have to say on this. To reiterate, he has not been convicted of anything _at this time._ Guilty of abominable behaviour? Yes. Guilty as testified by the witnesses? Yes. Guilty of any offence within the UK? I don't know.
> 
> I do think he should relinquish his military posts, pro tem. In the unlikely event of ever being publicly accepted again, they can be restored. He won't go to prison, I doubt if he will ever stand in a court. He won't ever be in the US again of course.
> 
> ...


First post of yours Ive ever actually liked, and then you put the thread on ignore, tsk


----------



## Athos (Jan 4, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Have heard in the dim and distant that it would be a debt and therefore enforceable in the UK. Although they have been laying the groundwork of no assets; no discernible income, lives in one of mummy's houses, free motor from Nonce Rover. What dough he does have stashed away has come in envelopes from despots and that. Perhaps the Swiss chalet..?


Enforcement isn't quite that simple; there's a number of conditions to be satisfied (I think I posted them some weeks ago.  ETA: see below). But, even if enforceable, there's the issue of him increasingly appearing to have no assets; I think he's being sued re unpaid mortgage on the chalet. It might be a case of "settle, and Mummy will pay you; go to trial and you'll get nothing, even if you win."



Athos said:


> Not necessarily.
> 
> It would only be enforceable if he couldn't demonstrate that it fails to satisfy six conditions.  The most difficult for her would be jurisdiction. Since he wasn't in the US when proceedings were served, she'd effectively have to establish he submitted to jurisdiction through prior agreement or voluntary engagement with proceedings.  Also, the bulk of any damages she would be awarded in a US court would most likely be punitive, which would probably it unenforceable here, as a matter of public policy.


----------



## Dystopiary (Jan 4, 2022)

Don't bite my head off, but is there any chance at all this could end up in a criminal court?


----------



## Athos (Jan 4, 2022)

Dystopiary said:


> Don't bite my head off, but is there any chance at all this could end up in a criminal court?


In the US, yes, not impossible.  Almost certainly not in the UK.


----------



## Dystopiary (Jan 4, 2022)

Athos said:


> In the US, yes, not impossible.  Almost certainly not in the UK.


Thank you.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jan 4, 2022)

Real classy energy


----------



## keybored (Jan 4, 2022)

not-bono-ever said:


> Tramps has always been a den of twats
> 
> 
> View attachment 304438


_(Free entry and drinks for under 18's)_


----------



## quiet guy (Jan 4, 2022)

Andy isn't used to people not kowtowing to him. He's pushing his legal team and so far Judge Kaplan isn't having any of it.


----------



## MickiQ (Jan 4, 2022)

So the left-leaning Urbs community are heaping praise upon a US judge, Strange Days Indeed.

EDIT: Mrs Q who so far has shown little to no interest in this case has offered her first pithy statement on it: 'He's in Deep Shit isn't he?'


----------



## Calamity1971 (Jan 4, 2022)

existentialist said:


> I reckon he'll fold way before then. Or have some kind of accident. Does he still enjoy flying?


Stray bullet 'on just another ordinary shooting weekend' ?


----------



## mx wcfc (Jan 4, 2022)

Calamity1971 said:


> Stray bullet 'on just another ordinary shooting weekend' ?


worked when the royal family wanted to get rid of William Rufus.


----------



## existentialist (Jan 4, 2022)

Calamity1971 said:


> Stray bullet 'on just another ordinary shooting weekend' ?


Perhaps Phil organised something before he kicked it?


----------



## Sue (Jan 4, 2022)

MickiQ said:


> So the left-leaning Urbs community are heaping praise upon a US judge, Strange Days Indeed.


Say what?


----------



## UrbaneFox (Jan 4, 2022)

existentialist said:


> I reckon he'll fold way before then. Or have some kind of accident. Does he still enjoy flying?


All that pent-up sweat will probably turn into a cancerous boil, burst on the inside, and every bit of him will turn septic.


----------



## AverageJoe (Jan 4, 2022)

Tbf, the judge has a very loose interpretation of "soon". 

_sings_ "Why are we waiting..." whilst banging my knife and fork on the table


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 4, 2022)

bemused said:


> She's suing him, she wants him to pay her, getting paid without a trial is less expensive for her and a sure thing.


If she wins the trial he'll get the costs.


----------



## bemused (Jan 4, 2022)

TopCat said:


> ugly


It's pragmatic.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 4, 2022)

elbows said:


> Terrible stuff, though sadly not surprising.
> 
> It seems to be getting a bit harder to find clips on youtube from the original Spitting Image that involve Andrew than it used to be.
> 
> I did find one of the ones I could find in the past on youtube, but using twitter instead. But there used to be at least one other on youtube and I cant find it these days.



Always closer to the knuckle than we ever knew.


----------



## teqniq (Jan 4, 2022)

MickiQ said:


> So the left-leaning Urbs community are heaping praise upon a US judge, Strange Days Indeed.





Sue said:


> Say what?


For my part so long as he does his job properly which he seems to be I have no great concerns. However I thought his name rang a bell. I believe he the same Lewis A. Kaplan who presided over the Steven Donzinger/Chevron case where he appears to have shown enormous bias in favour of the multinational. Thread I started on Urban here /derail.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 4, 2022)

Just checking back in. I take it the 'pretty soon' hasn't happened as of yet?


----------



## brogdale (Jan 4, 2022)

ITN News at 10 leading on the sweaty nonce.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 4, 2022)

Fail headline…


----------



## kenny g (Jan 4, 2022)

MickiQ said:


> The trouble with paying her off is that no matter what any agreement says, people are going to point and say "Look he must be a nonce (sweaty or otherwise) because he paid her off to keep it from coming out in court'  He is simply too high profile an individual to hope people will just forget about it. He needs to have his day in court and clear
> As an extra bonus this has also probably seriously fucked the Sussexes chances of making it in Hollywood. Every chat show that Harry ever goes someone is bound to ask him about his uncle.


Edit: beat me to it on the joke front


----------



## Sue (Jan 4, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Fail headline…
> 
> View attachment 304567


Not exactly snappy as headlines go...


----------



## Weller (Jan 4, 2022)

Where the Randy Andy nickname came from in his words went into the female quarters by mistake


----------



## bemused (Jan 4, 2022)

MickiQ said:


> The trouble with paying her off is that no matter what any agreement says, people are going to point and say "Look he must be a nonce (sweaty or otherwise) because he paid her off to keep it from coming out in court'  He is simply too high profile an individual to hope people will just forget about it. He needs to have his day in court and clear his name to have any real chance of his old life back. Trouble is it's glaringly obvious he doesn't want his day in court.
> As an extra bonus this has also probably seriously fucked the Sussexes chances of making it in Hollywood. Every chat show that Harry ever goes someone is bound to ask him about his uncle.


A settlement for her is a win because as you say everyone will assume he's guilty and she avoid reliving her trauma. Andrew is only going to want to go to trial if he's confident he'll win, to do that he'd need something pretty astonishing to do that - he's pictured with his victim, a convicted sexual trafficker and groomer at a paedophiles house.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 4, 2022)

MickiQ said:


> So the left-leaning Urbs community are heaping praise upon a US judge, Strange Days Indeed.


To be honest, in these dark times I'll take my justice from wherever it comes.


----------



## not henry (Jan 4, 2022)

bemused said:


> A settlement for her is a win because as you say everyone will assume he's guilty and she avoid reliving her trauma. Andrew is only going to want to go to trial if he's confident he'll win, to do that he'd need something pretty astonishing to do that - he's pictured with his victim, a convicted sexual trafficker and groomer at a paedophiles house.


clinton had his cock in a females mouth in the white house and there was dna, so all bets are off


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 4, 2022)

if his fans let it slide he'll be on the comedy circuit until eternity.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 4, 2022)

Sue said:


> Not exactly snappy as headlines go...




7th word is pithy…


----------



## Wilf (Jan 4, 2022)

Judges comments, not looking too good for HRH Nonce:


> Later, Brettler said: “I don’t even understand how there could be any question as to whether ‘other potential defendants’ had a meaning. Clearly, Ms Giuffre intended to release a broad category of individuals including royalty, including businessmen.”
> 
> Brettler also said Epstein “would never want to have to be dragged into a lawsuit were she to sue Prince Andrew later”.
> 
> ...


----------



## bemused (Jan 4, 2022)

Classy ... Jesus wept ... imagine arguing that victims of child sexual abuse shouldn't have access to justice based on how long ago they were abused, you probably can't because you're a human being with a soul.


----------



## Athos (Jan 4, 2022)

bemused said:


> A settlement for her is a win because as you say everyone will assume he's guilty and she avoid reliving her trauma. Andrew is only going to want to go to trial if he's confident he'll win, to do that he'd need something pretty astonishing to do that - he's pictured with his victim, a convicted sexual trafficker and groomer at a paedophiles house.


I think you underestimate how hard it will be for her to prove; it'll come down to her word against his.

And his defence will rip into her: her sexual history and drug use; the inconsistencies in her account; her own culpability in procuring girls for Epstein; portraying her as a liar after a payday, etc.

All the while portraying him as an upstanding person, a war hero, and an eligible bachelor who could have his pick of women without needing to procure girls.

A trial is an all-or-nothing roll of the dice for both of them; a settlement that eliminates the risk of the worst outcome for each of them might be something they both prefer.


----------



## tim (Jan 4, 2022)

bemused said:


> He's going to pay her off, we'll never know the number, he'll end up living in a castle chilling.
> 
> When do we get a vote for an elected head of state.



If he does end up in a castle it will be after his brother succeeds to the throne and it will be that extremely chilly one in Tower Hamlets. Those ravens love eyeballs.


----------



## 1927 (Jan 4, 2022)

Athos said:


> Enforcement isn't quite that simple; there's a number of conditions to be satisfied (I think I posted them some weeks ago.  ETA: see below). But, even if enforceable, there's the issue of him increasingly appearing to have no assets; I think he's being sued re unpaid mortgage on the chalet. It might be a case of "settle, and Mummy will pay you; go to trial and you'll get nothing, even if you win."


I understand the mortgage and debt on chalet has now been settled and he is now trying to sell it.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 4, 2022)

I'm sure if he ever gets a settlement of any kind against him, he'll be heading off to Saudi or some other regime that isn't that worried about accepting (rich) sex offenders.


----------



## tim (Jan 4, 2022)

Wilf said:


> I'm sure if he ever gets a settlement of any kind against him, he'll be heading off to Saudi or some other regime that isn't that worried about accepting (rich) sex offenders.



His problem is always been that despite his expensive tastes, he isn't rich. He just gets pocket money from his mum. As to safe regimes, there is nowhere safer for him than here.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 4, 2022)

tim said:


> His problem is always been that despite his expensive tastes, he isn't rich. He just gets pocket money from his mum. As to safe regimes, there is nowhere safer for him than here.


It's safe, legally, just about zero chance of extradition even if the yanks ever wanted to get him in a criminal court.  More problematic with having a prying press and others who will follow his every move. As you say, he's short of brass, but I suspect charlie or the bald one won't be as keen to fund him living his lifestyle if he keeps swanning around and showing them up over here. Perhaps they'd like to give him a 'settlement' and kick him out? All dressed up and rerouted so it isn't called 'prince nonce settlement from the public purse' of course.

I was about to say the nonce will have run out of money raising options after a trial, assuming his mam is dead by then. Same time, there's always some business cunt/newspaper publisher/UKIP 'grandee' who will step forward to amaze you as to the depravity of the human soul.


----------



## elbows (Jan 4, 2022)

Is the book Fall: The Mystery of Robert Maxwell any good? Much of the intelligence agency type side of things in it?


----------



## Wilf (Jan 4, 2022)

Good headline:

Hiding behind the loophole of a dead sex trafficker? Stay classy, Andrew​








						Hiding behind the loophole of a dead sex trafficker? Stay classy, Andrew | Marina Hyde
					

‘Potential defendants’ are sweating (if they can) over whether Virginia Giuffre’s settlement with Epstein will protect them, says Guardian columnist Marina Hyde




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Athos (Jan 4, 2022)

1927 said:


> I understand the mortgage and debt on chalet has now been settled and he is now trying to sell it.


Maybe. I don't know the details of that dispute.  But I seem to recall he had almost no equity in it; sold for what he paid for it, and mostly mortgaged.


----------



## MrSki (Jan 4, 2022)

elbows said:


> Is the book Fall: The Mystery of Robert Maxwell any good? Much of the intelligence agency type side of things in it?


Shortlisted for the Costa prize whatever that is.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 4, 2022)

Athos said:


> Maybe. I don't know the details of that dispute.  But I seem to recall he had almost no equity in it; sold for what he paid for it, and mostly mortgaged.


Yet strangely his family are all holidaying there this week.


----------



## elbows (Jan 4, 2022)

MrSki said:


> Shortlisted for the Costa prize whatever that is.


Yeah I only heard of it because it won:









						Costa Book Awards: Robert Maxwell biography among winners
					

John Preston charts the rise and fall of the notorious media mogul who was found dead at sea in 1991.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## 1927 (Jan 4, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Yet strangely his family are all holidaying there this week.


It's still theirs, they've settle the debt with the previous owner and are trying to sell. im pretty sure thats what i read somewhere yesterday anyway!


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 4, 2022)

1927 said:


> It's still theirs, they've settle the debt with the previous owner and are trying to sell. im pretty sure thats what i read somewhere yesterday anyway!


Anyone else and they'd be out on their ear!


----------



## Athos (Jan 4, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Yet strangely his family are all holidaying there this week.


Yeah, can't work out what's happened/happening with the chalet - whether or not it was sold, to whom, etc.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 5, 2022)

IIRC they bought it for £12m, six was mortgage and six was deferred payment. It was this deferred payment that the legal issues stemmed from as he defaulted on it. AFAIK that has now been settled and the mortgage is either paid or still being paid. He makes his Navy pension stretch does that lad.


----------



## killer b (Jan 5, 2022)

Wilf said:


> Good headline:
> 
> Hiding behind the loophole of a dead sex trafficker? Stay classy, Andrew​
> 
> ...


I thought this was the key paragraph in Hyde's article, and a cause for good cheer for republicans 

_But in the event that Giuffre’s case against Andrew proceeds and he loses it, and a multimillion-dollar payment has to be made, you get the feeling public attitudes would change overnight if the maternal bailout ran to forking out Andy’s damages for him. You can imagine people who are quite happy for the Queen to spend money restoring obscure Scottish castles and whatnot suddenly feeling less relaxed about it being spaffed on paying blood money for a sex offender. Whatever the accounting, I’m not sure any distinction between public funds and private income would be made by the average person._


----------



## existentialist (Jan 5, 2022)

Wilf said:


> It's safe, legally, just about zero chance of extradition even if the yanks ever wanted to get him in a criminal court.  More problematic with having a prying press and others who will follow his every move. As you say, he's short of brass, but I suspect charlie or the bald one won't be as keen to fund him living his lifestyle if he keeps swanning around and showing them up over here. Perhaps they'd like to give him a 'settlement' and kick him out? All dressed up and rerouted so it isn't called 'prince nonce settlement from the public purse' of course.
> 
> I was about to say the nonce will have run out of money raising options after a trial, assuming his mam is dead by then. Same time, there's always some business cunt/newspaper publisher/UKIP 'grandee' who will step forward to amaze you as to the depravity of the human soul.


Is there a vacancy for a "Governor of the Bahamas"?


----------



## killer b (Jan 5, 2022)

...the same of course is also true if he settles out of court - will the great british public stand for an undisclosed - but very large - sum to be paid out of essentially public funds to protect a nonce? I'm looking forward to finding out.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 5, 2022)

killer b said:


> ...the same of course is also true if he settles out of court - will the great british public stand for an undisclosed - but very large - sum to be paid out of essentially public funds to protect a nonce? I'm looking forward to finding out.




'ere you go...


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 5, 2022)

Wilf said:


> Good headline:
> 
> Hiding behind the loophole of a dead sex trafficker? Stay classy, Andrew​
> 
> ...


Let he who has never hid behind the loophole of a dead sex trafficker cast the first stone


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 5, 2022)

existentialist said:


> Is there a vacancy for a "Governor of the Bahamas"?


There may be a vacancy further south


----------



## MickiQ (Jan 5, 2022)

Wilf said:


> Good headline:
> 
> Hiding behind the loophole of a dead sex trafficker? Stay classy, Andrew​
> 
> ...


The Artist Formerly Known as Airmiles is an even better name for him that He Who Cannot Sweat


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 5, 2022)

killer b said:


> ...the same of course is also true if he settles out of court - will the great british public stand for an undisclosed - but very large - sum to be paid out of essentially public funds to protect a nonce? I'm looking forward to finding out.



Personally I reckon yes.  He'll be shunted to the side-lines and the queen will turn up somewhere and wave a bit and Kate will play some piano and all will be right with the world.

ETA: Of course queenie bowing out may help the cause as the establishment could just bury the whole disgusting fiasco in a barrage of nauseating patriotism and royal arse licking.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 5, 2022)

Of course there's another reason he might not be keen to settle - there may be other people who will be making claims. 
A bit late for an NDA.


----------



## MickiQ (Jan 5, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> IIRC they bought it for £12m, six was mortgage and six was deferred payment. It was this deferred payment that the legal issues stemmed from as he defaulted on it. AFAIK that has now been settled and the mortgage is either paid or still being paid. He makes his Navy pension stretch does that lad.


Certainly does; my FiL gets a Navy pension and he doesn't have a Swiss Chalet. A semi in Liverpool not really in the same league.


----------



## killer b (Jan 5, 2022)

Teaboy said:


> Personally I reckon yes.  He'll be shunted to the side-lines and the queen will turn up somewhere and wave a bit and Kate will play some piano and all will be right with the world.


I'm not so sure. If there's one thing the brits hate more than they love the queen, it's nonces.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 5, 2022)

Teaboy said:


> ETA: Of course queenie bowing out may help the cause as the establishment could just bury the whole disgusting fiasco in a barrage of nauseating patriotism and royal arse licking.


There was more of a republican movement in this country 125 years ago than there is now. Many people thought the dissolute prince of wales utterly unsuited to the throne, and hoped Victoria's death would see the end of the monarchy. Rather more work has to go into ending this than has thus far been the case


----------



## MickiQ (Jan 5, 2022)

Brenda popping her clogs before the trial is a bit of a nightmare scenario for TAFKA (going to start using that cos I like it), Mum forking out for his legal bills is one thing, she may very well even believe he is innocent. His brother or his nephew might not be so understanding or sympathetic especially if there is a big payout to be made. I do get the impression that Chucky knows he is nowhere near as popular as his Mum. Starting your reign by bailing out your noncy brother to tune of a few million not likely to improve that.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jan 5, 2022)

When you answer a question by posing a question.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jan 5, 2022)

Its been a bad couple of years for her maj hasn't it - Phillip fucked off, Harry fucked off and Andrew... well, he just won't fuck off.


----------



## LDC (Jan 5, 2022)

Everytime I think of his "I can't sweat cos I is a war hero" excuse I crack up. I mean, wtf?


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jan 5, 2022)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Everytime I think of his "I can't sweat cos I is a war hero" excuse I crack up. I mean, wtf?



Still less preposterous than when he claimed - in the same interview - he went to stay with a convicted paedo because he was "too honourable".


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 5, 2022)

Jeff Robinson said:


> When you answer a question by posing a question.







> This year is the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee, marking 70 years on the throne. Seven decades of service, duty, and loyalty. It should be a time of joy and celebration, probably much needed and anticipated by the relatively new widow. But as the old saying goes, a mother is only as happy as her unhappiest child…


----------



## LDC (Jan 5, 2022)

I want to watch his interview dubbed over with canned laughter at the appropriate points. Surely someone's done something like that? Or a Downfall thing?


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 5, 2022)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Everytime I think of his "I can't sweat cos I is a war hero" excuse I crack up. I mean, wtf?
> 
> View attachment 304605


Also, it wasn’t a party. I invited him to stay the weekend to go shooting. Big difference.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 5, 2022)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> I want to watch his interview dubbed over with canned laughter at the appropriate points. Surely someone's done something like that? Or a Downfall thing?


You mean you want Emily Maitlis's guffaws of disbelief restored to the soundtrack


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 5, 2022)




----------



## bluescreen (Jan 5, 2022)

That Maitless interview transcript here: 








						Prince Andrew Newsnight interview: Transcript in full
					

Read the full exchange between the Queen's son and BBC Newsnight's Emily Maitlis.



					www.bbc.co.uk
				




I haven't got very far with it:



> *EM: *You said you weren't very good friends but would you describe him as a good friend, did you trust him?
> *PA: *Yes, I think I probably did but again, I mean I don't go into a friendship looking for the wrong thing, if you understand what I mean.



No, I don't understand what he means. Or what he's trying to say.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 5, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> That Maitless interview transcript here:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


He's saying you've got me bang to rights


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 5, 2022)

It’s his face as he says these things!


----------



## xenon (Jan 5, 2022)

killer b said:


> I'm not so sure. If there's one thing the brits hate more than they love the queen, it's nonces.





killer b said:


> I'm not so sure. If there's one thing the brits hate more than they love the queen, it's nonces.



I think you’re being optimistic. There is a large enough section of the flag waving British public who will of the mind that well, she was 17. She can’t of been entirely innocent, must have known what the set up was. disgusting as that is. I heard something along those lines on a phone in just the other day.


----------



## LDC (Jan 5, 2022)

Just watched a clip. He couldn't even bring himself to say he regrets the friendship as, wait for it....

HE INTRODUCED ME TO SOME VERY USEFUL PEOPLE. What a good thing to say about a convicted sex offender.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 5, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> That Maitless interview transcript here:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




*PA: *Well I met through his girlfriend back in 1999 who… and I'd known her since she was at university in the UK and it would be, to some extent, a stretch to say that as it were we were close friends. I mean we were friends because of other people and I had a lot of opportunity to go to the United States but I didn't have much time with him.




*EM: *He was your guest as well, in 2000 Epstein was a guest at Windsor Castle and at Sandringham, he was brought right into the heart of the Royal Family at your invitation.
*PA: *But certainly at my invitation, not at the Royal Family's invitation but remember that it was his girlfriend that was the key element in this. He was the, as it were, plus one, to some extent in that aspect.



*EM: *He was released in July, within months by December of 2010 you went to stay with him at his New York mansion, why? Why were you staying with a convicted sex offender?
*PA: *Right, I have always… ever since this has happened and since this has become, as it were, public knowledge that I was there, I've questioned myself as to why did I go and what was I doing and was it the right thing to do? Now, I went there with the sole purpose of saying to him that because he had been convicted, it was inappropriate for us to be seen together.



Nothing to see here. The bullshiting noncey cunt.


----------



## LDC (Jan 5, 2022)

OMG... That can't be a picture of me in London as when I go out in London I wear a suit and tie. In that photo, that's what I call my traveling clothes.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 5, 2022)

I don’t know where the bar is.


----------



## killer b (Jan 5, 2022)

xenon said:


> I think you’re being optimistic. There is a large enough section of the flag waving British public who will of the mind that well, she was 17. She can’t of been entirely innocent, must have known what the set up was. disgusting as that is. I heard something along those lines on a phone in just the other day.


there are some of those people, and some of them are the kind of people who'd call a phone-in: but I think you're mistaken if you think there's lots of them.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 5, 2022)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> OMG... That can't be a picture of me in London as when I go out in London I wear a suit and tie. In that photo, that's what I call my traveling clothes.



What's wrong with that, huh?

Here he is in London in his suit and tie...




That it looks like the exact same clobber he's wearing in the picture in Maxwell's house is probably evidence of doctoring, or something.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 5, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> I don’t know where the bar is.


His eyesight maybe poor
But not as poor as his abysmal lying


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 5, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> I don’t know where the bar is.



Blink and you could miss it...


----------



## xenon (Jan 5, 2022)

I went to spend time with him because I wanted to give him the message that we should not be seen together. That’s why I stayed there for a whole week. And was photod walking round the park with him.
Actually there is probably a bit of truth to this. He went to say hey I better not come to any of your parties anymore old chap. Could look a bit off, you know given your conviction.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 5, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> His eyesight maybe poor
> But not as poor as his abysmal lying


The answers are mindbogglingly pathetic.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 5, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> The answers are mindbogglingly pathetic.


Yeh it's absolutely shite, after seeing that I wondered what else he'd done.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 5, 2022)

xenon said:


> I went to spend time with him because I wanted to give him the message that we should not be seen together. That’s why I stayed there for a whole week. And was photod walking round the park with him.
> Actually there is probably a bit of truth to this. He went to say hey I better not come to any of your parties anymore old chap. Could look a bit off, you know given your conviction.




Andy at Epstein's front door during that long goodbye...


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 5, 2022)

xenon said:


> I think you’re being optimistic. There is a large enough section of the flag waving British public who will of the mind that well, she was 17. She can’t of been entirely innocent, must have known what the set up was. disgusting as that is. I heard something along those lines on a phone in just the other day.


Not just flag-wavers either - there's a fair few republican minded people who say that too, and 'look! she's smiling in the photo, must be in it for the compo'. Big failure of understanding. Wouldn't like to guess what proportion of the public they are tho.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 5, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> Not just flag-wavers either - there's a fair few republican minded people who say that too, and 'look! she's smiling in the photo, must be in it for the compo'. Big failure of understanding. Wouldn't like to guess what proportion of the public they are tho.


The proportion that are utter wankers


----------



## 1927 (Jan 5, 2022)

xenon said:


> I went to spend time with him because I wanted to give him the message that we should not be seen together. That’s why I stayed there for a whole week. And was photod walking round the park with him.
> Actually there is probably a bit of truth to this. He went to say hey I better not come to any of your parties anymore old chap. Could look a bit off, you know given your conviction.


Who flies 3000 miles to tell someone, who wasn't a good friend, that they couldn't be friends anymore, even tho they hadn't had contact for years?


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 5, 2022)

1927 said:


> Who flies 3000 miles to tell someone, who wasn't a good friend, that they couldn't be friends anymore, even tho they hadn't had contact for years?



Maybe his phone had run out of credit?


----------



## two sheds (Jan 5, 2022)

Can you imagine him having to give evidence in court under oath?  with the prosecution dragging out all these quotes. I can't imagine what any discussions with lawyers were like before he gave the interview - there surely must have been some. Unless he felt so entitled that he thought his 'word' would be enough to dispel any doubts.


----------



## LDC (Jan 5, 2022)

Just wanted to add in that I know while we're all laughing at him and this situation, behind this all a load of horrendous things have happened to women because of people he called friends, so know it's far from just a laugh.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 5, 2022)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Just wanted to add in that I know while we're all laughing at him and this situation, behind this all a load of horrendous things have happened to women because of people he called friends, so know it's far from just a laugh.


Absolutely.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 5, 2022)

I hope someone has told him never to play poker.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 5, 2022)

two sheds said:


> Can you imagine him having to give evidence in court under oath?  with the prosecution dragging out all these quotes. I can't imagine what any discussions with lawyers were like before he gave the interview - there surely must have been some. Unless he felt so entitled that he thought his 'word' would be enough to dispel any doubts.












						Prince Andrew: Emily Maitlis says duke's interview answers are critical to sex assault case
					

The BBC Newsnight presenter says details of the 2019 interview are being pored over by both sides.



					www.bbc.co.uk
				




Amazingly Maitliss met with him a few days before the interview to go through it, the whole thing was his idea. PLEASE let him be cross-examined in court!


----------



## Diamond (Jan 5, 2022)

I have to say that I have been well out of the details of this case - I tend to think that these super high profile celeb nonce stories are actually a bit of a distraction from more consequential things - likely to be an unpopular opinion tho.  That all said, I did start reading up on developments recently and the Americans seem to be getting very excited about the idea that Epstein was an agent of some description.  All sounds pretty outlandish but that is rather intriguing - opening up the possibility that the elite establishment is somehow being manipulated by intelligence services on behalf of some other interest.


----------



## Athos (Jan 5, 2022)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Just wanted to add in that I know while we're all laughing at him and this situation, behind this all a load of horrendous things have happened to women because of people he called friends, so know it's far from just a laugh.


Quite.  And not only women - girls, children.


----------



## LDC (Jan 5, 2022)

Diamond said:


> I have to say that I have been well out of the details of this case - I tend to think that these super high profile celeb nonce stories are actually a bit of a distraction from more consequential things - likely to be an unpopular opinion tho.  That all said, I did start reading up on developments recently and the Americans seem to be getting very excited about the idea that Epstein was an agent of some description.  All sounds pretty outlandish but that is rather intriguing - opening up the possibility that the elite establishment is somehow being manipulated by intelligence services on behalf of some other interest.



Yeah, I've not been following it at all until the recent trial. And I do think on some level it's a distraction from all sorts of other stuff, but you know... it's 2022 and we take our fun where we can find it, and it's funny as fuck watching a thicko nonce causing a royal family car crash.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 5, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Prince Andrew: Emily Maitlis says duke's interview answers are critical to sex assault case
> 
> 
> The BBC Newsnight presenter says details of the 2019 interview are being pored over by both sides.
> ...



BBC getting their ducks in a row there.  Building their defence already having probably realised this interview will possibly be used in evidence should it go to trial.  After the most recent Diana interview fall out it would be interesting to be a fly on the wall in many places right now.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 5, 2022)

Diamond said:


> I have to say that I have been well out of the details of this case - I tend to think that these super high profile celeb nonce stories are actually a bit of a distraction from more consequential things - likely to be an unpopular opinion tho.  That all said, I did start reading up on developments recently and the Americans seem to be getting very excited about the idea that Epstein was an agent of some description.  All sounds pretty outlandish but that is rather intriguing - opening up the possibility that the elite establishment is somehow being manipulated by intelligence services on behalf of some other interest.


Noncery is a symptom of a corrupt and class-ridden society.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 5, 2022)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Just wanted to add in that I know while we're all laughing at him and this situation, behind this all a load of horrendous things have happened to women because of people he called friends, so know it's far from just a laugh.


I think we're enthused because it is so rare that one of this sort get caught. Even with the revelations of recent years you can count the number of people who've received their just desserts on your fingers and toes while the victims number in the hundreds if not thousands. This is really the tip of the iceberg


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 5, 2022)

two sheds said:


> Unless he felt so entitled that he thought his 'word' would be enough to dispel any doubts.



Oh, and I think that is precisely what he thought. His Communications Secretary, Jason Stein quit his job when Nonce-face refused to listen to him and insist he clear his name with the interview. Stein quit days before the interview, "Mr Stein left ‘by mutual consent’ after advising to Duke not to speak to Newsnight, warning it could backfire."


And look at the cunt after the interview, he thought it went so well he's doing a little Amarillo dance...


----------



## two sheds (Jan 5, 2022)

yes and the way he said "yes thank _you"_ after one of the most uniquely damning interviews to appear on the bbc.


----------



## seeformiles (Jan 5, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> This is really the tip of the iceberg



When the red tops come to a similar conclusion it’ll be “The Tip of the Viceberg”


----------



## scalyboy (Jan 5, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> What's wrong with that, huh?
> 
> Here he is in London in his suit and tie...
> 
> ...


Every time I see this photo, it looks less like dancing (the Mashed Potato? The Perspiring Prince? The Nonce Walk?) and more like desperately running away from a legal representative trying to serve a writ on his ass. Panic in his eyes.


----------



## Spymaster (Jan 5, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Prince Andrew: Emily Maitlis says duke's interview answers are critical to sex assault case
> 
> 
> The BBC Newsnight presenter says details of the 2019 interview are being pored over by both sides.
> ...


I read that yesterday. No idea why she wrote it. She comes across almost apologetic for causing the imminent meltdown of noncey trousers, when she should be anything but.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 5, 2022)

Jeff Robinson said:


> When you answer a question by posing a question.



Great comments on that. Loads of peado and nonce.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 5, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> I read that yesterday. No idea why she wrote it. She comes across almost apologetic for causing the imminent meltdown of noncey trousers, when she should be anything but.



Its an arse covering exercise because she and the BBC are possibly going to be getting pelters from certain sections of the media and public.  Maitless is basically saying there were no tricks (unlike the Diana interview) this is what he wanted to say.

The fall out from the interview could yet be massive because that is when he essentially implicated himself.  Its bound to be used as evidence in court of allowed.


----------



## andysays (Jan 5, 2022)

MickiQ said:


> So the left-leaning Urbs community are heaping praise upon a US judge, Strange Days Indeed.
> 
> EDIT: Mrs Q who so far has shown little to no interest in this case has offered her first pithy statement on it: 'He's in Deep Shit isn't he?'


Can't speak for anyone else, but my take on it would be that if even a US judge is calling out his bullshit for what it is, that tells us something about the level of bullshit.


----------



## Chilli.s (Jan 5, 2022)




----------



## Wilf (Jan 5, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Prince Andrew: Emily Maitlis says duke's interview answers are critical to sex assault case
> 
> 
> The BBC Newsnight presenter says details of the 2019 interview are being pored over by both sides.
> ...


My instant reaction to the interview was that it was a bit cowardly, in not seeking more details that were in the public domain.  Things like 'did royal protection officers know you had gone to pizza express'. 'you said we looked back and found I'd been at Pizza Express - who said that, was it your personal assistant', 'have you ever had sex whilst on trips as a royal or trade envoy' etc. I clearly got that wrong, partly because EM's growing tone of derision did for him in the interview. Most of all though, he completely fucked up what were simple questions that he should have had plausible answers for. As you say, it begs the question of who prepared him for the interview?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 5, 2022)

Wilf said:


> My instant reaction to the interview was that it was a bit cowardly, in not seeking more details that were in the public domain.  Things like 'did royal protection officers know you had gone to pizza express'. 'you said we looked back and found I'd been at Pizza Express - who said that, was it your personal assistant', 'have you ever had sex whilst on trips as a royal or trade envoy' etc. I clearly got that wrong, partly because EM's growing tone of derision did for him in the interview. Most of all though, he completely fucked up what were simple questions that he should have had plausible answers for. As you say, it begs the question of who prepared him for the interview?



Maitlis says there that the whole point was for the kiddy-diddler to put across his side of things, clear it all up. I guess that after the meeting she had with him a couple of days earlier she knew to just keeping handing him rope.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 5, 2022)

"It was Prince Andrew who volunteered the information to me in that early meeting that he was "unable to sweat". His Falkland Islands wartime experiences, he claimed, had produced a glut of adrenalin that meant he hadn't been able to sweat properly since being shot at.

I remember him asking me very directly if we thought that would be interesting to hear. And I said yes - *I was fascinated by adrenalin *- and that we wanted to hear as much detail of his account as we could."


----------



## rubbershoes (Jan 5, 2022)

Teaboy said:


> BBC getting their ducks in a row there.  Building their defence already having probably realised this interview will possibly be used in evidence should it go to trial.  After the most recent Diana interview fall out it would be interesting to be a fly on the wall in many places right now.



The difference is with Diana, the issue is whether and how the BBC seemingly manipulated her into giving the interview. 

With Andrew, it's  how much of what he said can be demonstrated to be bollocks


----------



## Wilf (Jan 5, 2022)

Diamond said:


> I have to say that I have been well out of the details of this case - I tend to think that these super high profile celeb nonce stories are actually *a bit of a distraction from more consequential things *- likely to be an unpopular opinion tho.  That all said, I did start reading up on developments recently and the Americans seem to be getting very excited about the idea that Epstein was an agent of some description.  All sounds pretty outlandish but that is rather intriguing - opening up the possibility that the elite establishment is somehow being manipulated by intelligence services on behalf of some other interest.


Why do you think this is inconsequential?


----------



## elbows (Jan 5, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> "It was Prince Andrew who volunteered the information to me in that early meeting that he was "unable to sweat". His Falkland Islands wartime experiences, he claimed, had produced a glut of adrenalin that meant he hadn't been able to sweat properly since being shot at.
> 
> I remember him asking me very directly if we thought that would be interesting to hear. And I said yes - *I was fascinated by adrenalin *- and that we wanted to hear as much detail of his account as we could."


I was so fascinated by a glut of Prince Andrenalin that I bought the company. Using money lent to me by the bouncing Czech.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 5, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> I read that yesterday. No idea why she wrote it. She comes across almost apologetic for causing the imminent meltdown of noncey trousers, when she should be anything but.


I'm beginning to feel slightly vindicated in my initial view that she didn't probe very far and didn't question his version of events i.e. he just fucked _himself _in the interview. 



> But the point of the interview was not to catch him out - I can't stress this enough. The point of the interview was just to have a record of Prince Andrew's own version of events. He wanted to set his own record straight. He offered minutiae and anecdote, detail and description, and we were ready to hear it all.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 5, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Maitlis says there that the whole point was for the kiddy-diddler to put across his side of things, clear it all up. I guess that after the meeting she had with him a couple of days earlier she knew to just keeping handing him rope.


Hard to tell.  I suspect the main thing for Newsnight was getting the interview regardless.  She doesn't say this, but I'm guessing the negotiations they entered into had an element of reassuring him it wouldn't be a grilling. In fact given how the interview was set up it's astonishing he came out of it so badly.

Just one simple question I'd have liked: _are you willing to take a lie detector test?_  Realise they aren't that reliable, but I'd have liked her approach to have been a bit more investigative.  Water under the bridge though, he came out of it appallingly anyway.


----------



## elbows (Jan 5, 2022)

Given his reputation for being an arrogant idiot, it wouldnt be hard to imagine them expecting sensational results even when pulling their punches was part of their plan.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 5, 2022)

Wilf said:


> Hard to tell.  I suspect the main thing for Newsnight was getting the interview regardless.  She doesn't say this, but I'm guessing the negotiations they entered into had an element of reassuring him it wouldn't be a grilling. In fact given how the interview was set up it's astonishing he came out of it so badly.
> 
> Just one simple question I'd have liked: _are you willing to take a lie detector test?_ Realise they aren't that reliable, but I'd have liked her approach to have been a bit more investigative. Water under the bridge though, he came out of it appallingly anyway.



 Like I say, after the preliminary meeting she knew that a bag of potatoes could sit in her chair and he'd still fuck himself, the thick nonce.


----------



## Diamond (Jan 5, 2022)

Wilf said:


> Why do you think this is inconsequential?



It affects a comparatively small and limited number of high profile people.

This is a celebrity story first and foremost, not a question of paramount justice (for me, at least).


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 5, 2022)

Diamond said:


> It affects a comparatively small and limited number of high profile people.
> 
> This is a celebrity story first and foremost, not a question of paramount justice (for me, at least).


I guess one test would be to ask how this will affect the future behaviour of people in positions of power who at one time might have thought they could abuse with impunity. Similar to how Savile et al coming to light has made certain things in certain contexts far more difficult to get away with. As with Savile, I'm not only interested in those who were abusing, but also in those who knew about it and did nothing. That's a certain kind of abusive cycle that might be broken as this all comes out.

And then it's just fun tbh to watch the idiot prince fuck himself up like this. Maybe shouldn't feel like that, but it's made me laugh.


----------



## Sue (Jan 5, 2022)

Diamond said:


> It affects a comparatively small and limited number of high profile people.
> 
> This is a celebrity story first and foremost, not a question of paramount justice (for me, at least).


Ah, so you're more concerned about the high-profile people affected than the victims? 

And I'm sure all of us want other, less high-profile, perpetrators brought to book too.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 5, 2022)

Diamond said:


> It affects a comparatively small and limited number of high profile people.
> 
> This is a celebrity story first and foremost, not a question of paramount justice (for me, at least).


It also affects a great number of working class female people but perhaps they don't count in your idea of paramount justice.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 5, 2022)

Diamond said:


> It affects a comparatively small and limited number of high profile people.
> 
> This is a celebrity story first and foremost, not a question of paramount justice (for me, at least).


Seems to me that's a story about class and gender and whether the powerful can get away with rape.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 5, 2022)

Wilf said:


> Seems to me that's a story about class and gender and whether the powerful can get away with rape.


... raping _children_, that is.


----------



## RainbowTown (Jan 5, 2022)

Diamond said:


> It affects a comparatively small and limited number of high profile people.
> 
> This is a celebrity story first and foremost, not a question of paramount justice (for me, at least).



No, this is story first and foremost about justice for the victims of sexual trafficking and  sexual abuse, and the bringing to account those who are and maybe responsible for it, regardless of 'celebrity' and status.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 5, 2022)

It's about the partial erosion of the idea that some people are above the law.

Only partial, mind. Most people would have had their laptop seized and be halfway through a prison sentence by now.

It's also enlightening that British royalty represents the low-hanging fruit compared to American business persons and so on.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 5, 2022)

Diamond said:


> It affects a comparatively small and limited number of high profile people.
> 
> This is a celebrity story first and foremost, not a question of paramount justice (for me, at least).


Most crimes affect a comparatively small number of people. But I doubt you'd say the Moors murders or the activities of Wayne couzens were inconsequential on the issue of numbers involved. Having a member of the Windsor cabal tried by a court albeit in America is unusual if not unprecedented. As mentioned above this involves large numbers of people - if you've followed the Epstein revelations there were many, many girls and women abused


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 5, 2022)

Diamond said:


> It affects a comparatively small and limited number of high profile people.
> 
> This is a celebrity story first and foremost, not a question of paramount justice (for me, at least).


Well that's nice for you. I wonder if Virginia Roberts sees it as 'a celebrity story first and foremost, not a question of paramount justice'


----------



## seeformiles (Jan 5, 2022)

TopCat said:


> Great comments on that. Loads of peado and nonce.



I felt moved to comment/troll on an article on the DM site that he’s single handedly advanced the abolition of the monarchy by a decade or two. I was expecting to be flamed for it but, bugger me, it became the second most top-rated comment. The times they may be a-changing?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 5, 2022)

seeformiles said:


> I felt moved to comment/troll on an article on the DM site that he’s single handedly advanced the abolition of the monarchy by a decade or two. I was expecting to be flamed for it but, bugger me, it became the second most top-rated comment. The times they may be a-changing?


They won't change just by themselves, the monarchy need to be shoved off their pedestal


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 5, 2022)

Pretty sure that polling shows that people under 40 in particular are really not that arsed about the monarchy. They aren't all rabid republicans - but they dont have the automatic deference and acceptance of it that older generations do. Lizzy clocking out, the unloved charles taking over  and the duke of nonce stuff means a serious weakening of the institution.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 5, 2022)

Kaka Tim said:


> Pretty sure that polling shows that people under 40 in particular are really not that arsed about the monarchy. They aren't all rabid republicans - but they dont have the automatic deference and acceptance of it that older generations do. Lizzy clocking out, the unloved charles taking over  and the duke of nonce stuff means a serious weakening of the institution.


I think the average age in the UK is 41. So I don't know how much mileage young people not being much arsed about the royal family matters. It's people young, middle-aged and yeh auld pushing together who'll get rid of the monarchy. I expect there are quite a few royalists who are reconsidering their position. Young people not being arsed about the monarchy means they don't see it as an issue - not that they want rid. I don't think the monarchy will necessarily be greatly weakened by this, it depends a) on what the queen and Charles knew when, and b) how they respond to Andrew being found guilty.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 5, 2022)




----------



## Athos (Jan 5, 2022)

In other news... In the parallel proceedings, Dershowitz just told the judge that he intends to depose Carolyn (a witness in the Maxwell trial), to prove that Giuffre was Epstein's co-conspirator, rather than victim.


----------



## vanya (Jan 5, 2022)

All republicans should give Andy a vote of thanks for doing their job for them.


----------



## weltweit (Jan 5, 2022)

Prince Andrew: Emily Maitlis says duke's interview answers are critical to sex assault case
					

The BBC Newsnight presenter says details of the 2019 interview are being pored over by both sides.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## Duncan2 (Jan 5, 2022)

Athos said:


> In other news... In the parallel proceedings, Dershowitz just told the judge that he intends to depose Carolyn (a witness in the Maxwell trial), to prove that Giuffre was Epstein's co-conspirator, rather than victim.


17 yr old co-conspirator?


----------



## Athos (Jan 5, 2022)

Duncan2 said:


> 17 yr old co-conspirator?


Not sure of the timelines; how old she was at the time he'll allege she conspired with Epstein to recruit Carolyn.  Wonder if Andrew will go down the same route, if it come to it?


----------



## Duncan2 (Jan 5, 2022)

Athos said:


> Not sure of the timelines; how old she was at the time he'll allege she conspired with Epstein to recruit Carolyn.  Wonder if Andrew will go down the same route, if it come to it?


Yes-perhaps he might attempt to hitch his wagon to Dershowitz somewhere down the line😟


----------



## ouirdeaux (Jan 5, 2022)

I don't think this is the nail in the coffin for the monarchy, much as I'd like to think it will be. Too many content with the status quo, for no better reason than that it's what they know. Even the young, who you'd hope weren't thoroughly ruined. But enough are.


----------



## Calamity1971 (Jan 5, 2022)

CWS on form as per.
Check out Brenda.


----------



## Athos (Jan 5, 2022)

Bloody he'll...









						Ghislaine Maxwell’s lawyers call for a retrial following juror’s interview
					

Maxwell’s legal team says they believe a new trial is warranted following revelations about juror




					www.google.com


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 6, 2022)

Athos said:


> Bloody he'll...
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Seems that is very common in the US and almost never succeeds. The whole point of a jury of your peers is that they bring a range of life experiences with them. Also a reason why jurors in the U.K. are prohibited from talking about shit like this.


----------



## keybored (Jan 6, 2022)

xenon said:


> I went to spend time with him because I wanted to give him the message that we should not be seen together. That’s why I stayed there for a whole week. And was photod walking round the park with him.
> Actually there is probably a bit of truth to this. He went to say hey I better not come to any of your parties anymore old chap. Could look a bit off, you know given your conviction.


Also I know some people will say _Blimey, it seems an awful drag flying all the way to America to tell a chap one can't be his chum anymore, what?_. But of course,  transatlantic telephone calls were so super expensive in those days and mummy had no spare telegrams I could cadge that week. So yah, bit of a pickle.


----------



## RileyOBlimey (Jan 6, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Seems that is very common in the US and almost never succeeds. The whole point of a jury of your peers is that they bring a range of life experiences with them. Also a reason why jurors in the U.K. are prohibited from talking about shit like this.



A bit like the old black panther that managed to be included in the OJ jury.


----------



## Athos (Jan 6, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Seems that is very common in the US and almost never succeeds. The whole point of a jury of your peers is that they bring a range of life experiences with them. Also a reason why jurors in the U.K. are prohibited from talking about shit like this.



I think the issue is likely to be whether or not he told the truth on the screening questionnaire.  I think that'd be more of a sticking point than the fact that he was abused.  The US jury system, including how they're picked is bonkers. But I guess there's pros and cons of them being transparent afterwards.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 6, 2022)

Athos said:


> I think the issue is likely to be whether or not he told the truth on the screening questionnaire.  I think that'd be more of a sticking point than the fact that he was abused.  The US jury system, including how they're picked is bonkers. But I guess there's pros and cons of them being transparent afterwards.


He did say he wasn't asked before he was chosen and would have said if he had been asked, but yes and should be easy to check.


----------



## Athos (Jan 6, 2022)

two sheds said:


> He did say he wasn't asked before he was chosen and would have said if he had been asked, but yes and should be easy to check.


The prospective jurors were given a questionnaire upon which even the prosecution seems to acknowledge that was asked.  He says he doesn't recall that question, but that he flew through the form.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 6, 2022)

keybored said:


> Also I know some people will say _Blimey, it seems an awful drag flying all the way to America to tell a chap one can't be his chum anymore, what?_. But of course,  transatlantic telephone calls were so super expensive in those days and mummy had no spare telegrams I could cadge that week. So yah, bit of a pickle.


He would walk 500 miles and he would walk 500 more to chat to a chance acquaintance let alone tell a friend he was dropping him. But you can't walk over the Atlantic so he had to fly


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 6, 2022)

Athos said:


> The prospective jurors were given a questionnaire upon which even the prosecution seems to acknowledge that was asked.  He says he doesn't recall that question, but that he flew through the form.



From what I read the question was whether friends or family members had been abused, but that could of course be wrong.


----------



## Athos (Jan 6, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> From what I read the question was whether friends or family members had been abused, but that could of course be wrong.


The Graun says:

'_One inquiry on the questionnaire stated: “Have *you* or a friend or family member ever been the victim of sexual harassment, sexual abuse, or sexual assault?”_'

I don't know how accurate that it, but it seems inherently unlikely they'd ask about family but not the prospective jurors themselves.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 6, 2022)

Athos said:


> The Graun says:
> 
> '_One inquiry on the questionnaire stated: “Have *you* or a friend or family member ever been the victim of sexual harassment, sexual abuse, or sexual assault?”_'
> 
> I don't know how accurate that it, but it seems inherently unlikely they'd ask about family but not the prospective jurors themselves.


Might have misread if as said he flew through the form


----------



## Athos (Jan 6, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> Might have misread if as said he flew through the form


Yeah, that's looking most likely.  But, if it had been accepted that a positive answer was a good basis to exclude a potential juror and this one answered falsely in the negative (even if innocently), or if the defence can say they'd have used one of their peremptory challenges to exclude this juror, that might be enough for a mistrial, especially given his comments about how he introduced stuff that wasn't evidence to his fellow jurors.


----------



## _Russ_ (Jan 6, 2022)

Its all just wishfull thinking, he wont ever go to court.


----------



## agricola (Jan 6, 2022)

Athos said:


> In other news... In the parallel proceedings, Dershowitz just told the judge that he intends to depose Carolyn (a witness in the Maxwell trial), to prove that Giuffre was Epstein's co-conspirator, rather than victim.



TBF that is how Epstein tried to operate - to try and get everyone involved guilty of something criminal, so he'd be protected whilst he raked in the cash.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 6, 2022)

Athos said:


> The Graun says:
> 
> '_One inquiry on the questionnaire stated: “Have *you* or a friend or family member ever been the victim of sexual harassment, sexual abuse, or sexual assault?”_'
> 
> I don't know how accurate that it, but it seems inherently unlikely they'd ask about family but not the prospective jurors themselves.



No, it did sound iffy, but as Pickman's model states, it's easy to misread a question, especially if there's lots of questions, which on a US form there will be.


----------



## scalyboy (Jan 6, 2022)

Athos said:


> Yeah, that's looking most likely.  But, if it had been accepted that a positive answer was a good basis to exclude a potential juror and this one answered falsely in the negative (even if innocently), or if the defence can say their have used one of their peremptory challenges to exclude this juror, that might be enough for a mistrial, especially given his comments about how he introduced stuff that wasn't evidence to his fellow jurors.


If this does eventually mean a mistrial and a retrial, surely she would be found guilty again? Her lawyers didn't seem to present much of a defence, other than "they're all lying" did they? I suppose the damning press coverage of her subsequent to her conviction could be argued as prejudicial as influencing second set of jurors, but I guess if that argument held water, there would never be any retrials...


----------



## agricola (Jan 6, 2022)

Athos said:


> I think the issue is likely to be whether or not he told the truth on the screening questionnaire.  I think that'd be more of a sticking point than the fact that he was abused.  The US jury system, including how they're picked is bonkers. But I guess there's pros and cons of them being transparent afterwards.



Perhaps, though I think where the mistrial will come from is (according to reports) him telling the rest of the jury that sexual assault survivors think in a certain way.  

Saying "I am a victim of a similar offence" may not be a problem, but saying "you can believe this person because victims of that offence behave in this way" is - he has become a witness, not a juror.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 6, 2022)

Of the five charges she was convicted on, the verdicts were unanimous, so unless Maxwell's legal team are planning on arguing that this was some serious Jimmy Stewart-level jurorising then I don't necessarily see the judge automatically waving the white flag on this.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 6, 2022)

agricola said:


> Perhaps, though I think where the mistrial will come from is (according to reports) him telling the rest of the jury that sexual assault survivors think in a certain way.
> 
> Saying "I am a victim of a similar offence" may not be a problem, but saying "you can believe this person because victims of that offence behave in this way" is - he has become a witness, not a juror.



It's a very fine line, as each juror brings a different life experience with them and those whose experience is more relevant to the case will of course speak up and be listened to by the others who have no experience in such matters, that's how the system is set up. But of course it could be too influential as to create unfair bias.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 6, 2022)

He wasn't trying to hide the fact, which does suggest he just innocently missed the 'you or' on the form. Even though it's a strange thing to miss.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 6, 2022)

More likely is that he answered the form entirely correctly and just doesn’t remember answering that question. People’s memory is generally poor  for details like what question they answered on a form months previously


----------



## Athos (Jan 6, 2022)

scalyboy said:


> If this does eventually mean a mistrial and a retrial, surely she would be found guilty again? Her lawyers didn't seem to present much of a defence, other than "they're all lying" did they? I suppose the damning press coverage of her subsequent to her conviction could be argued as prejudicial as influencing second set of jurors, but I guess if that argument held water, there would never be any retrials...


She's got nothing to lose. Maybe try a different approach next time, if she does get a second bite of the cherry.


----------



## Athos (Jan 6, 2022)

kabbes said:


> More likely is that he answered the form entirely correctly and just doesn’t remember answering that question. People’s memory is generally poor  for details like what question they answered on a form months previously


Maybe. But I'd have thought that if he had answered it correctly the defence would've used one of its peremptory challenges to exclude him.


----------



## Athos (Jan 6, 2022)

DaveCinzano said:


> Of the five charges she was convicted on, the verdicts were unanimous, so unless Maxwell's legal team are planning on arguing that this was some serious Jimmy Stewart-level jurorising then I don't necessarily see the judge automatically waving the white flag on this.


I hope you're right.  But the US system is much more of a stickler for procedural rules than ours.  I wouldn't rule out the possibility of a mistrial.


----------



## Athos (Jan 6, 2022)

agricola said:


> Perhaps, though I think where the mistrial will come from is (according to reports) him telling the rest of the jury that sexual assault survivors think in a certain way.
> 
> Saying "I am a victim of a similar offence" may not be a problem, but saying "you can believe this person because victims of that offence behave in this way" is - he has become a witness, not a juror.


This.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 6, 2022)

_Russ_ said:


> Its all just wishfull thinking, he wont ever go to court.


The problem is he's already been


----------



## existentialist (Jan 6, 2022)

two sheds said:


> He wasn't trying to hide the fact, which does suggest he just innocently missed the 'you or' on the form. Even though it's a strange thing to miss.


Given that terms like "sexual abuse" are often quite hot buttons for people, I could well understand that a casual skim-read of the question might have those words jump out for someone, and obscure the other subtleties. It's a bit like those things that get interminably posted on Facebook where all the vowels are missing, or there's a deliberate typo, but people are still able to read them, and often don't notice the typo or repeated word.


----------



## Athos (Jan 6, 2022)

For what it's worth, I *think* this is the final version of the questionnaire.  See number 48.


----------



## agricola (Jan 6, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> It's a very fine line, as each juror brings a different life experience with them and those whose experience is more relevant to the case will of course speak up and be listened to by the others who have no experience in such matters, that's how the system is set up. But of course it could be too influential as to create unfair bias.



Indeed, but sadly I think (if it is as described) this bloke's behaviour probably has stepped over the line here.  Using life experience might be fine, but when you start to tell the other jurors why they should believe a witness (or not) based on that then it is nearly always going introduce an element of unfairness.


----------



## 1927 (Jan 6, 2022)

keybored said:


> Also I know some people will say _Blimey, it seems an awful drag flying all the way to America to tell a chap one can't be his chum anymore, what?_. But of course,  transatlantic telephone calls were so super expensive in those days and mummy had no spare telegrams I could cadge that week. So yah, bit of a pickle.


I think seeing as they hadn't spoken in years that just not communicating again would have been enough. I doubt Epstein was sitting on Nonce Island wondering if Andy was still a mate!


----------



## 1927 (Jan 6, 2022)

If the argument is that she should have been released as a juror because of his experiences, why should the fact that he was the subject of sexual abuse be relevant? You could argue just as strongly that someone who hasn't been the subject of sexual abuse shouldn't be accepted on to the jury!


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 6, 2022)

Athos said:


> The Graun says:
> 
> '_One inquiry on the questionnaire stated: “Have *you* or a friend or family member ever been the victim of sexual harassment, sexual abuse, or sexual assault?”_'
> 
> I don't know how accurate that it, but it seems inherently unlikely they'd ask about family but not the prospective jurors themselves.


Kinell, how many people _don't_ have any friends or family who have ever been a victim of sexual harassment/abuse/assault?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 6, 2022)

Athos said:


> For what it's worth, I *think* this is the final version of the questionnaire.  See number 48.




Can see how you'd miss that, loads of questions on there. String her up!


----------



## Athos (Jan 6, 2022)

1927 said:


> If the argument is that she should have been released as a juror because of his experiences, why should the fact that he was the subject of sexual abuse be relevant? You could argue just as strongly that someone who hasn't been the subject of sexual abuse shouldn't be accepted on to the jury!


I think the argument will be a more procedural one.  In jury selection the defendant has a right to a limited number of peremptory challenges i.e. they can have potential jurors excluded without providing any reason (except if it's someone from a minority, in which case they need to give a reason); the argument will be she's been denied this right by virtue of the juror not telling the truth on the questionnaire.* And she'll argue that its not just a theoretical loss of a right; she'll claim a consequence is that he's effectively introduced untested and unqualified evidence to the jury about a victim's memory, which goes to a topic on which she called an expert witness.  (*Moreso if that is shown to be deliberate i.e. to avoid being excluded.)


----------



## scalyboy (Jan 6, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Seems that is very common in the US and almost never succeeds. The whole point of a jury of your peers is that they bring a range of life experiences with them. Also a reason why jurors in the U.K. are prohibited from talking about shit like this.


I've always thought it weird how US jurors (in some states, or across the entire USA?) are allowed to talk to the press... it seems different to me from trials being allowed to be filmed, as that arguably allows for more transparency than just a court transcript, as in the UK. 

But a juror could say any old made-up shite to a newspaper, or they might tell the truth and explain how they had arrived at a decision on some daft or prejudiced reason, which could undermine trust in the whole jury trial process. Either way it would be just one person's word rather than the impartiality of a filmed record.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 6, 2022)

scalyboy said:


> I've always thought it weird how US jurors (in some states, or across the entire USA?) are allowed to talk to the press... it seems different to me from trials being allowed to be filmed, as that arguably allows for more transparency than just a court transcript, as in the UK.
> 
> But a juror could say any old made-up shite to a newspaper, or they might tell the truth and explain how they had arrived at a decision on some daft or prejudiced reason, which could undermine trust in the whole jury trial process. Either way it would be just one person's word rather than the impartiality of a filmed record.


Aside from anything else, I think I'd be pissed off with a fellow juror spouting off if they mentioned anything to do with me, even obliquely - 'I changed my mind when the devastatingly handsome juror made that excellent point', etc. Whole point of jury service is that it's supposed to be a civic duty. Think it's reasonable to expect privacy to come along with that.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 6, 2022)

Athos said:


> Maybe. But I'd have thought that if he had answered it correctly the defence would've used one of its peremptory challenges to exclude him.


Maybe. Or maybe the defence rolled the die on this juror because his other responses and his demographic met their criteria and they didn’t want to risk the replacement being less friendly. Or maybe the defence team had their own blind spot when they reviewed his answers, such as only looking for red flags associated with female jurors, particularly if his answer was quite anodyne yet true. Lots of maybes


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 6, 2022)

Two jurors disclosed abuse during deliberations according to mail


----------



## Athos (Jan 6, 2022)

kabbes said:


> Maybe. Or maybe the defence rolled the die on this juror because his other responses and his demographic met their criteria and they didn’t want to risk the replacement being less friendly. Or maybe the defence team had their own blind spot when they reviewed his answers, such as only looking for red flags associated with female jurors, particularly if his answer was quite anodyne yet true. Lots of maybes


Yeah, we don't really know enough yet.  But, *if* he answered incorrectly, that's significant; it would mean she's effectively been denied her legal right to make an informed peremptory challenge.  Will be interesting to see the outcome.


----------



## Yossarian (Jan 6, 2022)

If the headline ends up being "Mistrial Declared After Loudmouth Juror Blabs to Press," they should maybe frame it and put on the wall of the jury room next time there's a trial this high-profile.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 6, 2022)

It does seem a bit of a cunt’s trick to possibly cause a mistrial because he couldn’t resist getting his five mins in the limelight.


----------



## Sue (Jan 6, 2022)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Kinell, how many people _don't_ have any friends or family who have ever been a victim of sexual harassment/abuse/assault?


This exactly.


----------



## agricola (Jan 6, 2022)

Yossarian said:


> If the headline ends up being "Mistrial Declared After Loudmouth Juror Blabs to Press," they should maybe frame it and put on the wall of the jury room next time there's a trial this high-profile.



Carbonite would also be effective in such situations


----------



## hegley (Jan 6, 2022)

.Edited - read the wrong q.


----------



## Duncan2 (Jan 6, 2022)

At least she isn't making a bail app.


----------



## Athos (Jan 6, 2022)

Juror 50 now has counsel appointed.

All parties' submissions and replies scheduled to be completed by early March.

For the court to decide whether to conduct an inquiry into these events.

The prosecution asking for an inquiry, presumably to preempt the defence who are saying an inquiry isn't necessary, and that there's already enough to order a retrial.  Essentially, their argument is:

'The Supreme Court has held that to be entitled to a new trial, “a party must first demonstrate that a juror failed to answer honestly a material question on _voir dire_, and then further show that a correct response would have provided a valid basis for a challenge for cause. _McDonough Power Equip., Inc. v. Greenwood_, 464 U.S. 548, 556 (1984). This standard applies
even if the juror’s conduct was merely inadvertent and not intentional. _United States v. Langford_, 990 F.2d 65, 68 (2d Cir. 1993) (“We read [the McDonough] multi-part test as governing not only inadvertent nondisclosures but also nondisclosures or misstatements that were deliberate.”).
...

Ms. Maxwell intends to request a new trial under Rule 33 because the “interest of justice so requires.” Fed. R. Crim. P. 33(a). Any submission will include all known undisputed remarks of the Juror, including recorded statements, the relevant questionnaire, and other noncontroverted facts. It is clear to Ms. Maxwell that based on this record alone a new trial is required. If this Court disagrees, however, Ms. Maxwell requests that a hearing be scheduled sooner than one month from now.

Ms. Maxwell also suggests that all the deliberating jurors will need to be examined, not to impeach the verdict, but to evaluate the Juror’s conduct.

Ms. Maxwell is drafting a Rule 33 motion to be filed on a schedule ordered by the Court.'


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jan 6, 2022)




----------



## andysays (Jan 6, 2022)

Athos said:


> The prospective jurors were given a questionnaire upon which even the prosecution seems to acknowledge that was asked.  He says he doesn't recall that question, but that he flew through the form.


Hard to see what objection the defence can legitimately have to saying he simply doesn't remember...


----------



## Wilf (Jan 6, 2022)

Only good thing about this is that a potential retrial would almost certainly raise her hopes for them to be dashed again.    _Almost _certainly.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 6, 2022)

andysays said:


> Hard to see what objection the defence can legitimately have to saying he simply doesn't remember...



Unless a photograph were to come to light of the juror with his arm around the bare midriff of the question, with a grinning question trafficker in the background.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 6, 2022)

How recently the question was formulated (even if it seemed older than it actually was) is of course a moot point, because there may or may not have been a prior agreement that the question would not be asked or answered by various parties who were (or indeed were not) previously aware of the question, notwithstanding the possibility that the question was in fact not a question per se but merely a representation of a question used to elicit answers to other questions as appropriate


----------



## Athos (Jan 6, 2022)

andysays said:


> Hard to see what objection the defence can legitimately have to saying he simply doesn't remember...


It's appears from his interviews with the press that he is a victim of sexual abuse.

It's clear that he was asked whether or not he was a victim of sexual abuse in the _voir dire_ questionnaire, as part of the process for selecting a jury.

He says he doesn't remember being asked, but, if he was, he'd have disclosed the fact.  Albeit he seems to admit that he "flew through" the form.

Had he answered that he was a victim of sexual abuse, the defence would have no grounds to object, now.  That they have filed this motion strongly implies that the redacted part of this letter to the court says that he answered that question in the negative (which will be a matter of record).

The defendant will argue that, if he'd answered accurately, she'd have exercised her right to have him excluded from the jury.  And that, because she was prevented from doing so, a situation arose whereby he effectively improperly gave evidence to other jurors about victims' memories (an important issue in the trial).  Something his own account to the press about what happened in the jury room seems to support.

She'll say this meant she did not receive a fair trial.


----------



## Athos (Jan 6, 2022)

DaveCinzano said:


> How recently the question was formulated (even if it seemed older than it actually was) is of course a moot point, because there may or may not have been a prior agreement that the question would not be asked or answered by various parties who were (or indeed were not) previously aware of the question, notwithstanding the possibility that the question was in fact not a question per se but merely a representation of a question used to elicit answers to other questions as appropriate


_“The one great principle of the [American] law is, to make business for itself. There is no other principle distinctly, certainly, and consistently maintained through all its narrow turnings. Viewed by this light it becomes a coherent scheme, and not the monstrous maze the laity are apt to think it. Let them but once clearly perceive that its grand principle is to make business for itself at their expense, and surely they will cease to grumble.”_


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 6, 2022)

Athos said:


> It's appears from his interviews with the press that he is a victim of sexual abuse.
> 
> It's clear that he was asked whether or not he was a victim of sexual abuse in the _voir dire_ questionnaire, as part of the process for selecting a jury.
> 
> ...




Let's go again then, she can spunk another $3m on being found doubly guilty.


----------



## existentialist (Jan 6, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Let's go again then, she can spunk another $3m on being found doubly guilty.


Tsk, you know you shouldn't prejudge the outcome of a court case


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 6, 2022)

Athos said:


> _“The one great principle of the [American] law is, to make business for itself. There is no other principle distinctly, certainly, and consistently maintained through all its narrow turnings. Viewed by this light it becomes a coherent scheme, and not the monstrous maze the laity are apt to think it. Let them but once clearly perceive that its grand principle is to make business for itself at their expense, and surely they will cease to grumble.”_


How'd you like your grits?


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 6, 2022)

DaveCinzano said:


> How'd you like your grits?


I like mine with a kiss.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 6, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> I like mine with a kiss.


Better osculate than never


----------



## UrbaneFox (Jan 6, 2022)

keybored said:


> Also I know some people will say _Blimey, it seems an awful drag flying all the way to America to tell a chap one can't be his chum anymore, what?_. But of course,  transatlantic telephone calls were so super expensive in those days and mummy had no spare telegrams I could cadge that week. So yah, bit of a pickle.


Epstein was a thick-skinned man. Sometimes one really had trouble getting through to him. You can see in the photo of us walking round the park that I'm trying to explain matters in the simplest way possible, but would he listen?




Weller said:


> View attachment 304167


----------



## weltweit (Jan 6, 2022)

So, no news yet on the US Judge Kaplan's ruminations on the contract between Guiffre and Epstein?


----------



## quiet guy (Jan 6, 2022)




----------



## seeformiles (Jan 7, 2022)

The judge deciding on the 2009 agreement appears to have a different definition of “shortly” and “soon” to the rest of us - or perhaps it’s within the context of judicial time? 🤔


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 7, 2022)

seeformiles said:


> The judge deciding on the 2009 agreement appears to have a different definition of “shortly” and “soon” to the rest of us - or perhaps it’s within the context of judicial time? 🤔




0730 in New York, so maybe later today..?


----------



## Spymaster (Jan 7, 2022)

seeformiles said:


> The judge deciding on the 2009 agreement appears to have a different definition of “shortly” and “soon” to the rest of us - or perhaps it’s within the context of judicial time? 🤔


He made the decision to throw it out on the day and has just been on the piss since. The delay is just to ensure he’s not accused of making a snap decision.


----------



## MickiQ (Jan 7, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> He made the decision to throw it out on the day and has just been on the piss since. The delay is just to ensure he’s not accused of making a snap decision.


I can see your legal training showing itself there Spy


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 7, 2022)

seeformiles said:


> The judge deciding on the 2009 agreement appears to have a different definition of “shortly” and “soon” to the rest of us - or perhaps it’s within the context of judicial time? 🤔


Indeed. William Jennens - Wikipedia


----------



## Wilf (Jan 7, 2022)

Based on zero legal knowledge, it wouldn't surprise me if it was thrown out. Just in a common sense approach it feels like the 2009 agreement is bound to impinge on future attempted actions. The job for Giuffre's team is to demonstrate that this one is outside of that previous settlement.  If that's the outcome I think it will be wrong, for the obvious reason of nonces not getting their due deserts.  But it would also feel wrong if a victim can't get recompense from both her trafficker _and _abuser.

Anyway, I'm hopeless at predicting football and general elections, so I hope I've got that one wrong too.


----------



## seeformiles (Jan 7, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> Indeed. William Jennens - Wikipedia



Crikey - they knew how to play a long game alright


----------



## Athos (Jan 7, 2022)

From listening to the hearing, I suspect Andrew won't succeed in getting the claim struck out at this stage.

The judge needs to take sufficient time to draft a rationale that's not open to appeal.

But hopefully we'll hear today.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 7, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> Indeed. William Jennens - Wikipedia




William Jennens (possibly Jennings) (1701–1798), also known as William the Miser, William the Rich, and *The Miser of Acton *

As Spymaster is known.


----------



## danski (Jan 7, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> William Jennens (possibly Jennings) (1701–1798), also known as William the Miser, William the Rich, and *The Miser of Acton *
> 
> As Spymaster is known.


Spymiser.


----------



## Part 2 (Jan 7, 2022)

Isn't it Kate's 40th on Sunday? 

If anything gets announced today there'll be plenty of pictures of her ready to hide any bad news behind.


----------



## weltweit (Jan 7, 2022)

I don't know the veracity of this, it is an MSN link, they are saying no money from mummy for Andrew.  





__





						Prince Andrew on 'crunch time' to raise fast cash as Queen refuses to pay legal fees
					





					www.msn.com


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 7, 2022)

Part 2 said:


> Isn't it Kate's 40th on Sunday?
> 
> If anything gets announced today there'll be plenty of pictures of her ready to hide any bad news behind.




She'll get the piano out again, her and baldy doing a few Chaz & Dave numbers and the nation will soon forget about the revolting paedophile uncle.


----------



## Part 2 (Jan 7, 2022)

weltweit said:


> I don't know the veracity of this, it is an MSN link, they are saying no money from mummy for Andrew.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I think that story was in The Mirror yesterday aswell.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 7, 2022)

weltweit said:


> I don't know the veracity of this, it is an MSN link, they are saying no money from mummy for Andrew.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



From what I could tell she's fronting his lawyers fees, but won't be involved in any payouts, either to make it go away or ordered by a court after a guilty. Cos she has advisors that she actually listens to, I would imagine.

Meanwhile the nonce is trying to fast-track the offloading of the Swiss house so that by the time his guilty comes through he will own nothing at all, no houses (he lives in one of mummy's), no car (Nonce Rover give him a free one on loan cos of his mummy) and so on. The welching, sweaty nonce.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 7, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> From what I could tell she's fronting his lawyers fees, but won't be involved in any payouts, either to make it go away or ordered by a court after a guilty. Cos she has advisors that she actually listens to, I would imagine.


You can imagine the conversation:  '_right here's a few more million to fight this thing.  Obviously, you won't need any more for a payout, as you are definitley not a sweaty nonce? That's right isn't it son? Y'know, I've always thought you were too honourable, so there's no chance you'll have to pay millions for being a child rapist? Yeah?_


----------



## killer b (Jan 7, 2022)

_The 61-year old "wants to clear his name" from accusations that he sexually abused Giuffre three times when she was only 17 years old. But he does not want to do so in court as he fears that a trial could cause irreparable damage to the reputation of the British monarchy.

As such, Prince Andrew is said to be looking to settle the case outside of court. This would mean putting out a hefty sum which sources claimed could go as high as £3million. Queen Elizabeth II will reportedly "not assist" with the settlement._

I'm curious about how paying her 3 million quid would clear his name tbh


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 7, 2022)

killer b said:


> I'm curious about how paying her 3 million quid would clear his name tbh




Worked for Whacko


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 7, 2022)

killer b said:


> _The 61-year old "wants to clear his name" from accusations that he sexually abused Giuffre three times when she was only 17 years old. But he does not want to do so in court as he fears that a trial could cause irreparable damage to the reputation of the British monarchy.
> 
> As such, Prince Andrew is said to be looking to settle the case outside of court. This would mean putting out a hefty sum which sources claimed could go as high as £3million. Queen Elizabeth II will reportedly "not assist" with the settlement._
> 
> I'm curious about how paying her 3 million quid would clear his name tbh


Ask Micheal Jackson. Oh wait….


----------



## Wilf (Jan 7, 2022)

Assuming the judge allows a trial to go ahead, his preferred choices might now be:

1. Go to trial and win.  Lots of dirty laundry, the bad publicity gets wound up by several notches, but he get's a nominal victory.
2. Pay off.  A loss in every sense, but slightly better than...
3. Go to trial and lose. All the bad publicity + cost + (slight) risk of criminal conviction.  Royal family probably have to expel him.

His problem is that if the judge allows a trial, he loses control of all the above. Can't even guarantee Giuffre would accept 2.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 7, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Worked for Whacko


Suppose he had an army of crazed fans who wouldn't (and still won't) accept he was a nonce.  Also had the cultural capital of his music.  Sweaty had the cultural capital of being a royal, but that seems to have eroded as every bit of this story has unfolded.  Aside from some appalling Daily Mail commentators, everybody hates Andy.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 7, 2022)

Wilf said:


> everybody hates Andy.






Spoiler: Surely his old mum loves him?


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 7, 2022)

killer b said:


> _The 61-year old "wants to clear his name" from accusations that he sexually abused Giuffre three times when she was only 17 years old. But he does not want to do so in court as he fears that a trial could cause irreparable damage to the reputation of the British monarchy.
> 
> As such, Prince Andrew is said to be looking to settle the case outside of court. This would mean putting out a hefty sum which sources claimed could go as high as £3million. Queen Elizabeth II will reportedly "not assist" with the settlement._
> 
> I'm curious about how paying her 3 million quid would clear his name tbh


I'm curious where he would get the money from.


----------



## killer b (Jan 7, 2022)

equationgirl said:


> I'm curious where he would get the money from.


it says in the article, by selling his chalet


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 7, 2022)

equationgirl said:


> I'm curious where he would get the money from.


Fat trimmed off al-Yamamah, barrel-scraped pork, that sort of thing


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 7, 2022)

killer b said:


> it says in the article, by selling his chalet


We've covered this before, the chalet was bought with a mortgage and he still owed the sellers a large wedge, to be recouped through the chalet's sale. So doubt there's a whole lot left after that.


----------



## Athos (Jan 7, 2022)

From memory, didn't he owe £6M to the seller, and about £12M was mortgaged.  Given the sale price people are talking about, and the fact he's not the sole owner, I can't see how he's got the equity in it to pay much.  Which might be a deliberate strategy, of course.


----------



## Sprocket. (Jan 7, 2022)

killer b said:


> it says in the article, by selling his chalet


What about a free toblerone to every adult and child in the country.


----------



## Athos (Jan 7, 2022)

equationgirl said:


> We've covered this before, the chalet was bought with a mortgage and he still owed the sellers a large wedge, to be recouped through the chalet's sale. So doubt there's a whole lot left after that.


Great minds...


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 7, 2022)

equationgirl said:


> We've covered this before, the chalet was bought with a mortgage and he still owed the sellers a large wedge, to be recouped through the chalet's sale. So doubt there's a whole lot left after that.




Latest figures I read was bought for £16.6m, selling 7 years later for £17.2m. It was a 'family investment', raised less than a semi in Stockwell would have done in the same time.


----------



## Athos (Jan 7, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Latest figures I read was bought for £16.6m, selling 7 years later for £17.2m. It was a 'family investment', raised less than a semi in Stockwell would have done in the same time.


Possibly not as good as a base for skiiing, though.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 7, 2022)

Athos said:


> Possibly not as good as a base for skiiing, though.



I have only skied in Verbier once, that was enough, would rather slide down the escalators at Stockwell station than mix with the banking scumbags that infest that hellhole.


----------



## killer b (Jan 7, 2022)

equationgirl said:


> We've covered this before, the chalet was bought with a mortgage and he still owed the sellers a large wedge, to be recouped through the chalet's sale. So doubt there's a whole lot left after that.


I don't have a great deal of knowledge about the French property market or how much of the mortgage he's paid off, so I wouldn't like to guess how much he'll be able to raise tbh


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 7, 2022)

killer b said:


> I don't have a great deal of knowledge about the French property market or how much of the mortgage he's paid off, so I wouldn't like to guess how much he'll be able to raise tbh



I don't really like it very much at all, but will tune in for that episode of Can't Pay We'll Take It Away.


----------



## Idris2002 (Jan 7, 2022)

danski said:


> Spymiser.


Beware of Spymiser.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 7, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I don't really like it very much at all, but will tune in for that episode of Can't Pay We'll Take It Away.


Images of him with the Maxwell brothers, some union jack waist-coated flag-waving Buck House fanbois and assorted wackos disconsolately wailing from the pavement _But we do not stand under! We do not stand under!_


----------



## Athos (Jan 7, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I have only skied in Verbier once, that was enough, would rather slide down the escalators at Stockwell station than mix with the banking scumbags that infest that hellhole.


I've never been skiing, partly for that very reason. Ditto golf.


----------



## Part 2 (Jan 7, 2022)

Re: sale of chaelt. This is what was in the Mirror yesterday. Makes no mention of how much is owed on the mortgage.



Andrew, 61, owns Chalet Helora in the ski resort of Verbier with ex-wife Sarah Ferguson. It is understood to be his only method of raising substantial amounts of cash. The pair agreed last September to sell the seven-bedroom property to a wealthy European investor. They bought it from millionaire French socialite Isabelle de Rouvre in 2014 for £16.6m. 

But the deal has not been completed. Sources close to the Duke suggest he wants to push the sale through “urgently”. Andrew and Fergie still owe £6.6million from the original purchase. Ms de Rouvre last year threatened to take them to court in Switzerland after they missed a payment date in December 2019.

The Yorks later agreed to pay the cash once they complete the sale of the property. As Andrew prepares to hear his fate Fergie, 62, and their children are this week enjoying “a final family holiday” at the chalet.


----------



## Athos (Jan 7, 2022)

If Tatler is to be believed, they're selling for £17m, with £6.7M going to the former owner; they'll also have to settle what's left of the mortgage (reported to have been £13.25M in 2016).  It appears it was owned jointly, so he'd only get a share of any remaining equity.   All of which suggests he doesn't stand to make much from it, given the size of what he's facing.









						French socialite revealed as former friend suing Prince Andrew and Sarah, Duchess of York for £6.7 million owed on Swiss ski chalet
					

The Yorks have found themselves in financial hot water following the Epstein scandal




					www.tatler.com


----------



## tim (Jan 7, 2022)

_Russ_ said:


> Its all just wishfull thinking, he wont ever go to court.


Definitely Princona non Grata at the Court of St James these days.


----------



## tim (Jan 7, 2022)

DaveCinzano said:


> Of the five charges she was convicted on, the verdicts were unanimous, so unless Maxwell's legal team are planning on arguing that this was some serious Jimmy Stewart-level jurorising then I don't necessarily see the judge automatically waving the white flag on this.


In US federal trials the verdict has to be unanimous, not majority. This is one of the things I have learnt in the past fortnight.


----------



## Badgers (Jan 7, 2022)

'Furious' William and Charles 'want Andrew to sort out own financial mess'
					

Senior royals are fuming over the prospect of the Queen footing Andrew's legal bills as the Duke of York is now trying to force through the sale of his £17million Swiss chalet




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## Wilf (Jan 7, 2022)

Must admit, sarah ferguson doesn't strike me as the type who would forego her share in the proceeds of the chalet sale.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 7, 2022)

A bankrupt royal. Just imagine.


----------



## Duncan2 (Jan 7, 2022)

Wilf said:


> Must admit, sarah ferguson doesn't strike me as the type who would forego her share in the proceeds of the chalet sale.


Suppose she could write Budgie the sequel


----------



## Duncan2 (Jan 7, 2022)

Duncan2 said:


> Suppose she could write Budgie the sequel


Budgie flies South ?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 7, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> A bankrupt royal. Just imagine.


They've been morally bankrupt for a long long time


----------



## RainbowTown (Jan 7, 2022)

weltweit said:


> I don't know the veracity of this, it is an MSN link, they are saying no money from mummy for Andrew.





bluescreen said:


> A bankrupt royal. Just imagine.



Breaking News: this just seen outside Buckingham Palace....


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 7, 2022)

Lots of talk about Andy trying to rush through the sale of the chalet to fund his defence. Must say that if I were in the frame to buy the place my offer would drop by around 7 million quid right now...


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 7, 2022)

Duncan2 said:


> Suppose she could write Budgie the sequel


Budgie And The Supermax Prison Break


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 7, 2022)

DaveCinzano said:


> Budgie And The Supermax Prison Break



That’s an idea, now Verbier is off the cards maybe they should get a pad in Breckinridge, handy for visiting ADX Florence.


----------



## Duncan2 (Jan 7, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Lots of talk about Andy trying to rush through the sale of the chalet to fund his defence. Must say that if I were in the frame to buy the place my offer would drop by around 7 million quid right now...


Giuffre might even accept the chalet in full and final settlement??


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 7, 2022)

Duncan2 said:


> Giuffre might even accept the chalet in full and final settlement??


And Andrew's head mounted as a trophy


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 7, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> That’s an idea, now Verbier is off the cards maybe they should get a pad in Breckinridge, handy for visiting ADC Florence.


I have now spent more time than ever I thought possible browsing realtor.com


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 7, 2022)

DaveCinzano said:


> Budgie And The Supermax Prison Break


Budgie and the birdman of florence


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 7, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> Budgie and the birdman of florence


Budgie And The Boor-Shank Redemption


----------



## Sue (Jan 7, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> Budgie and the birdman of florence


Budgie and the penguins. (A Pingu crossover would make millions.)

Eta Are we still allowed to mention penguins? I've  lost track.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 7, 2022)

Sue said:


> Budgie and the penguins. (A Pingu crossover would make millions.)
> 
> Eta Are we still allowed to mention penguins? I've  lost track.


We can mention penguins but not t*u*h*er


----------



## weltweit (Jan 7, 2022)

Well the judge certainly has a different definition of the word SOON to me!


----------



## Duncan2 (Jan 7, 2022)

Sue said:


> Budgie and the penguins. (A Pingu crossover would make millions.)
> 
> Eta Are we still allowed to mention penguins? I've  lost track.


Reckon Pickmans Model should ghost that.


----------



## T & P (Jan 7, 2022)

weltweit said:


> Well the judge certainly has a different definition of the word SOON to me!


Undoubtedly waiting to see if the agonisingly long wait might cause Andrew to break into a sweat.


----------



## weltweit (Jan 7, 2022)

T & P said:


> Undoubtedly waiting to see if the agonisingly long wait might cause Andrew to break into a sweat.


I expect Andrew is wondering if he can get a job in a pizza place to pay his bills!

eta probably below him I expect ..


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 7, 2022)

weltweit said:


> I expect Andrew is wondering if he can get a job in a pizza place to pay his bills!


I’ve worked in kitchens before and his inability to sweat would probably finish him off. So here’s hoping


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 7, 2022)

weltweit said:


> Well the judge certainly has a different definition of the word SOON to me!




Maybe leaving it as late in the day as possible to make sure his lawyers have to work through the weekend…


----------



## Sue (Jan 7, 2022)

Duncan2 said:


> Reckon Pickmans Model should ghost that.


...including suitable bits of propaganda to start the indoctrination early .


----------



## T & P (Jan 7, 2022)

weltweit said:


> I expect Andrew is wondering if he can get a job in a pizza place to pay his bills!
> 
> eta probably below him I expect ..


Dunno, you would imagine someone who was clearly so impressed with a restaurant they remembered the exact date of their visit eleven years later, would like nothing more than work there.


----------



## clicker (Jan 7, 2022)

Fergie is probably already in negotiations with Oprah.


----------



## weltweit (Jan 7, 2022)

I wonder ..

Does the delay signify anything? 

Perhaps that the earlier contract might be binding and the judge is pondering that?


----------



## Duncan2 (Jan 7, 2022)

weltweit said:


> I wonder ..
> 
> Does the delay signify anything?
> 
> Perhaps that the earlier contract might be binding and the judge is pondering that?


Yes-he couldn't be being got at could he🤔


----------



## UrbaneFox (Jan 7, 2022)

clicker said:


> Fergie is probably already in negotiations with Oprah.


Prince Andrew and Fergie must have a few thousand Diana stories between them. The old cash cow still has a few years.


----------



## LDC (Jan 7, 2022)

I do hope this is real...


----------



## quiet guy (Jan 7, 2022)

UrbaneFox said:


> The old cash cow still has a few years.


That's no way to talk of Fergie


----------



## fucthest8 (Jan 7, 2022)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> I do hope this is real...
> 
> View attachment 304963



Is it time to discuss the Fawcett Inn somewhere near Plymouth iirc? Big sign outside saying "children welcome" back in the 80s

Too much?


----------



## Santino (Jan 7, 2022)

Great craic, lads


----------



## TopCat (Jan 7, 2022)

seeformiles said:


> The judge deciding on the 2009 agreement appears to have a different definition of “shortly” and “soon” to the rest of us - or perhaps it’s within the context of judicial time? 🤔


He set out his stall. Now bribe me. (i'm a bit pissed).


----------



## TopCat (Jan 7, 2022)

killer b said:


> _The 61-year old "wants to clear his name" from accusations that he sexually abused Giuffre three times when she was only 17 years old. But he does not want to do so in court as he fears that a trial could cause irreparable damage to the reputation of the British monarchy.
> 
> As such, Prince Andrew is said to be looking to settle the case outside of court. This would mean putting out a hefty sum which sources claimed could go as high as £3million. Queen Elizabeth II will reportedly "not assist" with the settlement._
> 
> I'm curious about how paying her 3 million quid would clear his name tbh


Michael Jackson paid out multi millions to children who alleged he raped them. His fans got over this quick. But does Andrew have any fans bar Fergie?


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 8, 2022)

TopCat said:


> He set out his stall. Now bribe me. (i'm a bit pissed).


Funnily enough it occurred to me that someone who was too honourable to drop a friend without doing it in person, too sweatless to misconduct himself in a nightclub, and too principled to admit to doing something he'd never done, would certainly never stoop to bribery. And that any member of the judiciary who found himself receiving unsolicited requests that could potentially cause a diplomatic incident might seek advice before proceeding to make any statement to that effect. So you must be wrong.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 8, 2022)

Today's Fail carries an interview Carolyn, one of the most persuasive witnesses in Maxwell's trial. She says Roberts texted her at the time that she had just slept with HWCS. 
But she doesn't forgive Roberts for recruiting her. Giuffre's lawyer Boies was contacted for comment and pointed out that Roberts/Giuffre was only 17 herself at the time, and also a victim. 

DM is keen to stress that Carolyn (who gives her full name) gave the interview for free because 



> 'I'm not ashamed at being a victim of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. For other girls that have been victimised, I want them to know that it is OK to come out and tell somebody – even if you don't want to be identified – and the sooner the better.
> 
> 'I want people to know these terrible things have happened to me and that I am a survivor.
> 
> I want to let the other victims know, there's no timeframe on when you can talk about it, to get help. I'm very happy being a wife and a mother and I want to show people how the tragedies in my life did not stop me. I'm overcoming them. I'm not going to let Maxwell and Epstein ruin my life any more. I'm grateful every day when I wake up.'



So it's not looking so good for HWCS in terms of denying the encounter, or for Giuffre if you're one of those people who still reckon that teenage girls are incapable of being seduced, corrupted and coerced.


----------



## Spymaster (Jan 8, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> Today's Fail carries an interview Carolyn, one of the most persuasive witnesses in Maxwell's trial. She says Roberts texted her at the time that she had just slept with HWCS.
> But she doesn't forgive Roberts for recruiting her. Giuffre's lawyer Boies was contacted for comment and pointed out that Roberts/Giuffre was only 17 herself at the time, and also a victim.
> 
> DM is keen to stress that Carolyn (who gives her full name) gave the interview for free because
> ...



HWCS?


----------



## Athos (Jan 8, 2022)

He Who Can't Sweat


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 8, 2022)

Edit: thought better of that post


----------



## seeformiles (Jan 8, 2022)

TopCat said:


> He set out his stall. Now bribe me. (i'm a bit pissed).



I’ve been imagining all the frantic horse trading going on behind the scenes.


----------



## Athos (Jan 8, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> Today's Fail carries an interview Carolyn, one of the most persuasive witnesses in Maxwell's trial. She says Roberts texted her at the time that she had just slept with HWCS.
> But she doesn't forgive Roberts for recruiting her. Giuffre's lawyer Boies was contacted for comment and pointed out that Roberts/Giuffre was only 17 herself at the time, and also a victim.
> 
> DM is keen to stress that Carolyn (who gives her full name) gave the interview for free because
> ...


If it goes to trial, there'll be a battle to have that text admitted/excluded; defence will claim it's hearsay; plaintiff will say it's covered by an exemption.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 8, 2022)

Athos said:


> If it goes to trial, there'll be a battle to have that text admitted/excluded; defence will claim it's hearsay; plaintiff will say it's covered by an exemption.


It'll just be hearsay anyway as I doubt very much she still has the text. But doesn't help anyone's shining sweatless image.


----------



## Athos (Jan 8, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> It'll just be hearsay anyway as I doubt very much she still has the text. But doesn't help anyone's shining sweatless image.


Even the text itself would be hearsay.


----------



## Badgers (Jan 8, 2022)




----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 8, 2022)

TopCat said:


> Michael Jackson paid out multi millions to children who alleged he raped them. His fans got over this quick. But does Andrew have any fans bar Fergie?



You never know with royalists. Not one of them had a problem with prince Philip being a nonce.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 8, 2022)

SpookyFrank said:


> You never know with royalists. Not one of them had a problem with prince Philip being a nonce.


Who accused prince phillip of being a nonce?


----------



## tim (Jan 8, 2022)

TopCat said:


> Who accused prince phillip of being a nonce?



He had Stephen Ward murdered according to my mum, but that was because he had photos of him being fellated by the Duchess of Argyle.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 8, 2022)

tim said:


> He had Stephen Ward murdered according to my mum, but that was because he had photos of him being fellated by the Duchess of Argyle.


But was the duchess of argyle not up for it? I just never heard of anyone saying he was a rapist. Lots of other things though.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 8, 2022)

Virginia Giuffre told me in 2001 she slept with Prince Andrew, witness says
					

The claims by Carolyn Andriano, who testified at Ghislaine Maxwell’s trial, will add pressure on the prince




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 8, 2022)

TopCat said:


> But was the duchess of argyle not up for it? I just never heard of anyone saying he was a rapist. Lots of other things though.


I believe the Duchess had a certain reputation that was used to vilify her and she was thoroughly slut shamed by society, even though her then husband was behaving in the same way if not worse plus the evidence suggests he only married her for her vast fortune. But he was a man so...

The Duchess never revealed the identity of the man in the photographs.


----------



## tim (Jan 8, 2022)

TopCat said:


> But was the duchess of argyle not up for it? I just never heard of anyone saying he was a rapist. Lots of other things though.


Exactly, no noncing just murdering.


----------



## Spymaster (Jan 8, 2022)

tim said:


> Exactly, no noncing just murdering.



According to your mum.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 8, 2022)

tim said:


> Exactly, no noncing just murdering.


To be fair, the royals restrict themselves to one nonce per generation.  Mountbatten already had the gig.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 8, 2022)

Wilf said:


> To be fair, the royals restrict themselves to one nonce per generation.  Mountbatten already had the gig.


... though they are a bit more free and easy when it comes to their aides:




__





						Footman alleges he was raped by aide of Charles
					

A former footman in the royal household accused an aide to the Prince of Wales last night of raping him. George Smith, a one-time valet to Diana, Princess of Wales, also accused the heir to the throne of "covering up" the incident.




					www.independent.co.uk


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 8, 2022)

tim said:


> Exactly, no noncing just murdering.




Murder limited to the people who help Fergie with the tricky task of getting dressed, Jane Andrews - Wikipedia


----------



## TopCat (Jan 8, 2022)

Royals await anxiously the fallout from Prince Andrew’s disgrace
					

The Queen’s favourite child, under siege in the press as he awaits a critical court ruling, is not the first obnoxious royal. But he has damaged ‘the Firm’ – and it will have to change




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 8, 2022)

TopCat said:


> Who accused prince phillip of being a nonce?



Accusation doesn't enter into it. It's a matter of public record that he groomed an underage girl.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 8, 2022)

Badgers said:


> View attachment 305044


The Lying King.


----------



## UrbaneFox (Jan 8, 2022)

TopCat said:


> Who accused prince phillip of being a nonce?


He had a photograph of the young Princess Elizabeth, dressed I presume, but she was still under age.


----------



## UrbaneFox (Jan 8, 2022)

Badgers said:


> View attachment 305044


The Prince and the Porker? 

Tell us, reveal all


----------



## clicker (Jan 8, 2022)

If I were a rich man
Ya ba dibba dibba dibba dibba dibba dibba dum
All day long I'd biddy biddy bum
If I were a wealthy man
I wouldn't have to work hard
Ya ba dibba dibba dibba dibba dibba dibba dum
If I were a biddy biddy rich


----------



## tim (Jan 8, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> According to your mum.


Yes, one of her other theories was that HRM had been impregnated by JFK during a state visit which led to the Duke of York arriving a decade or so after his elder siblings. She never showed much interest in the paternity of the Earl of Wessex, but why would anyone. I doubt if even the Queen herself remembers


----------



## Badgers (Jan 8, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> The Lying King.


Predator the musical?


----------



## Spymaster (Jan 8, 2022)

UrbaneFox said:


> He had a photograph of the young Princess Elizabeth, dressed I presume, but she was still under age.



Eh? 

I guess that makes quite a few of us nonces then.


----------



## Saunders (Jan 8, 2022)

I don’t know if I’m being precious or not. But this thread seems to be mostly lots of middle aged men having opinions and making jokes about a middle aged man having sex with a very young woman who didn’t especially want to be there.


----------



## UrbaneFox (Jan 8, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> Eh?
> 
> I guess that makes quite a few of us nonces then.


It's as crap as that.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 8, 2022)

Saunders said:


> I don’t know if I’m being precious or not. But this thread seems to be mostly lots of middle aged men having opinions and making jokes about a middle aged man having sex with a very young woman who didn’t especially want to be there.


I'm not entirely sure what point you're making here but when you've been with us a while longer you'll get used to our black humour which bubbles up now and again on most any long thread.


----------



## weltweit (Jan 8, 2022)

Saunders said:


> I don’t know if I’m being precious or not. But this thread seems to be mostly lots of middle aged men having opinions and making jokes about a middle aged man having sex with a very young woman who didn’t especially want to be there.


You are probably right, but in defence of the thread, the actual action with respect to court cases and the like is very spread out with lots of waiting in between real substance. In the space between action some irreverence is probably inevitable.

But you are right, the subject of the thread is that Prince Andrew, Duke of York, a man of inherited privilege, allegedly had sexual relations on three occasions with Virginia Louise Giuffre (then Robertson) aged 17 at the time. Further that the late convicted Jeffrey Epstein and the recently convicted Ghislaine Maxwell trafficked her against her will for this very purpose.


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Jan 8, 2022)

Yossarian said:


> The language surrounding these cases definitely needs an overhaul - I don't think the US media could have referred to the victims as victims before the verdict because of libel laws and the fact that lawyers could argue that prejudicial media coverage meant their client didn't get a fair trial and deserves an appeal, but there's got to be a better term than "accuser" or "alleged victim."


In the Kyle Rittenhouse case, the prosecution were told not to refer to the three people shot by Rittenhouse as 'victims' as that could be prejudicial.









						The people Kyle Rittenhouse shot can’t be called ‘victims’, a judge says. Surprised? | Akin Olla
					

Though he crossed state lines and shot three people with a semi-automatic rifle, Rittenhouse has been treated with an alarming degree of grace




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## two sheds (Jan 8, 2022)

although he said the people he shot could be referred to as 'rioters' and similar as I recall.


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 8, 2022)

Saunders said:


> I don’t know if I’m being precious or not. But this thread seems to be mostly lots of middle aged men having opinions and making jokes about a middle aged man having sex with a very young woman who didn’t especially want to be there.


There's been some things I have objected to. But you're mostly on the money.


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Jan 8, 2022)

Ming said:


> To reiterate. It's easy in a professional and well run facility to prevent someone in crisis from killing themselves. I've been doing it for 13 years in 3 countries. No deaths on my wards. The best i would say in this case was he was allowed enough space to kill himself. Imagine the amount of media attention the staff must have known they were under. If i was in their shoes i'd have been double vigilant. But they weren't. They ignored the most basic SOPs. Now why is that? TBH I wouldn't be surprised if Maxwell went the same way. It's the powers that be saying 'i'll kill you in public because i can'. To set another example.


It's not unheard of for people to kill themselves in prison. I knew someone who did, Anna Baker, and there was a spate of suicides around the time, albeit many years ago. I knew her briefly before she ended up in Styal, and she talked to me about being afraid she wouldn't be able to cope with going cold turkey.









						Inquiry called into suicides at women's prison
					

Minister acts as overdose brings deaths at Styal to six in a year.




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## TopCat (Jan 8, 2022)

Badgers said:


> Predator the musical?



what the fuck


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 8, 2022)

AnnO'Neemus said:


> It's not unheard of for people to kill themselves in prison. I knew someone who did, Anna Baker, and there was a spate of suicides around the time, albeit many years ago. I knew her briefly before she ended up in Styal, and she talked to me about being afraid she wouldn't be able to cope with going cold turkey.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


A fella mentioned on another thread today killed himself in his cell just using his teeth!


----------



## Wilf (Jan 8, 2022)

Saunders said:


> I don’t know if I’m being precious or not. But this thread seems to be mostly lots of middle aged men having opinions and making jokes about a middle aged man having sex with a very young woman who didn’t especially want to be there.


Well, know what you mean and I've wondered myself whether there should be _any _jokes on a thread like this (while joining in the jokes myself, I might add).  SAme time, wherever the line is, I think we've been on the right side of it. None of the jokes that I've seen are anything but anti-nonce/HWCS and there's been nothing that I've seen that in any way diminishes what the victims have gone through. 

I'm not going to dig them out, but there have been a couple of isolated posts along the lines of 'it might have been exploitative, but surely it wasn't illegal'.  I think people genuinely might not know the law or about the control that people like epstein exerted, but that kind of stuff has worried more than any jokes.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 8, 2022)

That’s the second time the acronym HWCS has been used as if we’re supposed to know what if refers to?


----------



## two sheds (Jan 8, 2022)

took me a while but he who cannot sweat i'm assuming


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 8, 2022)

two sheds said:


> took me a while but he who cannot sweat i'm assuming


Oh ffs


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Jan 8, 2022)

8ball said:


> I thought he wasn’t Epstein’s mate.


Prince Andrew was Epstein's mate. Up until the point Epstein was released from prison after serving time for child sex offences, when Prince Andrew very honourably went to visit Epstein in New York, staying in Epstein's mansion for several days and attending a dinner party there in his (Prince Andrew's) honour and walking in the park together, all in order to tell Epstein that he could no longer be friends with him. 

Because of course when you no longer want to be friends with someone, you go and stay in their home, hang out a lot with that person and mutual friends, to prove the point that you're not friends. Because that's how not being friends with someone works when you're a very honourable person.


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Jan 8, 2022)

andysays said:


> If being vindicated was your aim, and if you genuinely thought you'd be vindicated if it went to trial, I can't see why you'd go through all these ridiculous and frankly desperate legal maneuverings to try to avoid it getting to trial.
> 
> Whatever the eventual legal outcome, his reputation is utterly destroyed forever. If that was (part of) Virginia Guiffre's aim, I think she's pretty much achieved it already.


I'm beginning to wonder if there is another aim. Given Guiffre wasn't a party to the Maxwell trial. Often in cases like this, other victims come forward.

I'm wondering whether Guiffre might not be also trying to pave the way for other women to bring cases against Prince Andrew and Maxwell? For it's likely that in the process of discovery admissions might inadvertently be made, and other avenues of discovery opened up? 

I'm wondering whether anything he (and his legal team) says or does in the Guiffre case in order to evade action will provide evidence about other trips, events and people, and facilitate other charges or law suits?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 8, 2022)

Think of all the money Andrew saved through not buying anti-perspirant

And now the lawyers have it all


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 8, 2022)

Wasn't Mountbatten allegedly a nonce?
And there's been no explanation as of yet as to what Charles was up to with Savile on their jaunts. Do the security services actually raise alarms about noncing? What are they for?


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Jan 8, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> What are they for?



the security services are there to protect the interests of the establishment...


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 8, 2022)

Puddy_Tat said:


> the security services are there to protect the interests of the establishment...


Yeah it was a pretty daft question.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 8, 2022)

Notice the dilemma when the cops were asked to permit delivery of a subpoena to Andrew. Not a regular security detail, more like his personal mini police force.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 9, 2022)

I saw his name written as Andrew Windsor for the first time. This is good. Bring down the whole family brand.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 9, 2022)

Saunders said:


> I don’t know if I’m being precious or not. But this thread seems to be mostly lots of middle aged men having opinions and making jokes about a middle aged man having sex with a very young woman who didn’t especially want to be there.



you have a point but I dont think the piss taking is in any way meant to deride the victims of this cabal. The royals are an infuriating parasitic legacy that are pretty much untouchable- distasteful piss takery is a way of dealing with this. Its a close one I can understand


----------



## Ming (Jan 9, 2022)

AnnO'Neemus said:


> It's not unheard of for people to kill themselves in prison. I knew someone who did, Anna Baker, and there was a spate of suicides around the time, albeit many years ago. I knew her briefly before she ended up in Styal, and she talked to me about being afraid she wouldn't be able to cope with going cold turkey.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Sorry to hear that. It’s not impossible. But the people in that prison failed on every level to prevent him from  doing so (if he did). I work on locked psychiatric units would hazard a guess that the staff culture is different to prisons. I do occasionally pull shifts at the local forensic hospital however (like Ashworth, Broadmoor or Rampton in the UK). Again very difficult to kill yourself there (I’ve never heard of a case).


----------



## Wilf (Jan 9, 2022)

ska invita said:


> I saw his name written as Andrew Windsor for the first time. This is good. Bring down the whole family brand.


Ooh, where? I'd like to see it in print.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 9, 2022)

Saunders said:


> I don’t know if I’m being precious or not. But this thread seems to be mostly lots of middle aged men having opinions and making jokes about a middle aged man having sex with a very young woman who didn’t especially want to be there.


TBF the crime took place twenty years ago. I wasn't a middle aged man then.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 9, 2022)

Saunders said:


> I don’t know if I’m being precious or not. But this thread seems to be mostly lots of middle aged men having opinions and making jokes about a middle aged man having sex with a very young woman who didn’t especially want to be there.


Jokes aside, not really sure it would be a good topic for middle-aged men to just have no opinion about.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 9, 2022)

Raheem said:


> Jokes aside, not really sure it would be a good topic for middle-aged men to just have no opinion about.


Sounds like some weird identity politics thing where only those who share demographic similarities with victims are allowed to speak.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 9, 2022)

Wilf said:


> Ooh, where? I'd like to see it in print.


I can't remember   
It made an impression as I hadnt seen it before


----------



## andysays (Jan 9, 2022)

AnnO'Neemus said:


> I'm beginning to wonder if there is another aim. Given Guiffre wasn't a party to the Maxwell trial. Often in cases like this, other victims come forward.
> 
> I'm wondering whether Guiffre might not be also trying to pave the way for other women to bring cases against Prince Andrew and Maxwell? For it's likely that in the process of discovery admissions might inadvertently be made, and other avenues of discovery opened up?
> 
> I'm wondering whether anything he (and his legal team) says or does in the Guiffre case in order to evade action will provide evidence about other trips, events and people, and facilitate other charges or law suits?



That's certainly a possibility, even if it isn't a deliberate aim of Guiffre.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 9, 2022)

Wilf said:


> Ooh, where? I'd like to see it in print.


its come back to me


----------



## tim (Jan 9, 2022)

ska invita said:


> its come back to me
> 
> View attachment 305135


The roots of bourgeois depravity are pretty much the same as the root of proletarian depravity in reality.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 9, 2022)

tim said:


> The roots of bourgeois depravity are pretty much the same as the root of proletarian depravity in reality.



What do you mean, some kind of original sin thing?
I think the materially powerful are far more comfortable and able in flexing their power over others


----------



## ska invita (Jan 9, 2022)

Heres the piece btw, maybe its interesting to talk about




__





						Epstein saga continues - Weekly Worker
					

With Andrew Windsor embroiled in the scandal, with Ghislaine Maxwell facing years in jail, with the possibility of top names being named, Paul Demarty searches for the roots of bourgeois depravity




					weeklyworker.co.uk
				




heres a little relevant extract


> trouble is to get things the right way around - to understand moral depravity, or at least some subset of it, as an effect rather than a cause of social structures, especially class structures. It so happens that, when it comes to the Epstein scandal, the case is very easy to make. After all, sexual exploitation of the weak is a peccadillo of all historic ruling classes, from the droit de seigneur of the medieval lord to the rampant use of slaves for sex, both in the ancient world and in the antebellum southern US - and even to the 12th century bishop of Winchester, Henry of Blois, who obtained a licence from the king to run a string of brothels across the south of England (his employees were whimsically nicknamed the ‘Winchester geese’). Equally characteristically, rising or progressive classes denounce such outrages as evidence of the need for change.
> 
> The last such class to successfully supplant its exploiters was, of course, the bourgeoisie; but - for all the piety of Calvinist and Quaker entrepreneurs in the high period of the industrial revolution - the result has been the same. Already, by the 1840s, Marx and Engels could have a good laugh in the Communist manifesto at the sport among bourgeois gentlemen of seducing each others’ wives; by the end of that century, moral panics about child prostitution in British cities were routine and, while perhaps exaggerated by conservative religious sentiments, certainly reflected a real and dismal phenomenon among poor women.
> 
> At the end of that historical development is someone like Epstein, who more or less reinvents the aristocratic veneration of one’s own blood and sense of entitlement to the bodies of one’s lessers from first principles. In place of the sociopathic knights so ably brought to popular consciousness by Game of thrones, we have this bizarre gasbag, a billionaire drunk on pound-shop Nietzscheanism - him and his corrupt, cowardly and equally narcissistic friends.


----------



## tim (Jan 9, 2022)

ska invita said:


> What do you mean, some kind of original sin thing?
> I think the materially powerful are far more comfortable and able in flexing their power over others



You only need opportunity and a relatively minor differential in power to make depravity possible. Princes and socialites abuse, but so do teachers, taxi drivers, colleagues, those in the year above you at school, cousins and siblings

I'm happy to see Epstein, Windsor and Maxwell exposed for who they are and for them to answer for their specific crimes but I think the idea that abuse is something that is mainly perpetuated on one by the elites or on the other hand by despised minorities is a dangerous one.

 It's a tendency seen in the Qanon movement, the obsession on the far-Right with "grooming gangs" and at times here in threads like this 'How much evidence is there of long term high level UK paedophile ring?' How much evidence is there of long term high level UK paedophile ring?


----------



## ska invita (Jan 9, 2022)

tim said:


> You only need opportunity and a relatively minor differential in power to make depravity possible. Princes and socialites abuse, but so do teachers, taxi drivers, colleagues, those in the year above you at school, cousins and siblings
> 
> I'm happy to see Epstein, Windsor and Maxwell exposed for who they are and for them to answer for their specific crimes but I think the idea that abuse is something that is mainly perpetuated on one by the elites or on the other hand by despised minorities is a dangerous one.
> 
> It's a tendency seen in the Qanon movement, the obsession on the far-Right with "grooming gangs" and at times here in threads like this 'How much evidence is there of long term high level UK paedophile ring?' How much evidence is there of long term high level UK paedophile ring?


I take your point... specifically on the issue of sexual abuse of minors theres bound to be a large range of factors behind the behaviour...and I agree, theres many places within society where people can exert what power they have over others

I still would expect however that if we were able to look closely at the lives of the most privileged and powerful - lets say white men worth at least a couple of million - we would find more "abuse of power" than we would in other strata of the population of an equal size (unless forced to crime because of poverty perhaps).


----------



## Apathy (Jan 9, 2022)

Yeah a predatory predisposition and where ever there is opportunity to act on it.   I don’t know if I’m more disgusted (maybe its more shocking) when I see this kind of abuse exerted by people with more social status and wealth, if it’s those factors that enable it, and the likelihood of them getting away with it.  Maybe it’s the sense that they should know better? That’s if we hold them to a higher standard.  Or is it just the recklessness of it because of what they stand to lose; then that must mean that they’re certainly weaker and/or sicker in the head.  But you could say that for anyone of any status.  There can still be a wall of silence and there can be conspiracy.   It’s as you say;  the differential in power that’s key.


----------



## Athos (Jan 9, 2022)

ska invita said:


> I still would expect however that if we were able to look closely at the lives of the most privileged and powerful - lets say white men worth at least a couple of million - we would find more "abuse of power" than we would in other strata of the population of an equal size (unless forced to crime because of poverty perhaps).


Of course power is more likely to be abused by those with power.  People - regardless of sex or race - use what power they have to get what they want.  That's why we should aspire to a society in which people don't have power over others, rather than one in which power over others is distributed proportionately by sex and race.

ETA: I'm not saying that racial, sexual, etc. inequality isn't a problem; we must tackle it.  But we should recognise that, ultimately, the importance of those categories lies in the extent to which they're proxies for power, and to recognise they often fall short of that purpose e.g. Maxwell's power was anathema to the interests of women.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 9, 2022)

Athos said:


> Of course power is more likely to be abused by those with power.  People - regardless of sex or race -


Sex and race can in many circumstances equate to a form of power also


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 9, 2022)

Athos said:


> Of course power is more likely to be abused by those with power.


I'm curious to hear about how power is abused by people without power


----------



## Athos (Jan 9, 2022)

ska invita said:


> Sex and race can in many circumstances equate to a form of power also


Not intrinsically, but I wouldn't argue with the idea that sex and race often bestow power in a society organised as ours is.


----------



## Athos (Jan 9, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> I'm curious to hear about how power is abused by people without power


Quite.


----------



## mango5 (Jan 9, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Sounds like some weird identity politics thing where only those who share demographic similarities with victims are allowed to speak.


It doesn't to me. The responses to Saunders post are dismissive and patronising. Middle aged men aren't being cancelled on this thread.


----------



## agricola (Jan 9, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> I'm curious to hear about how power is abused by people without power



isn't that abstracting electricity?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 9, 2022)

agricola said:


> isn't that abstracting electricity?


People without power clearly aren't abstracting electricity


----------



## Duncan2 (Jan 9, 2022)

mango5 said:


> It doesn't to me. The responses to Saunders post are dismissive and patronising. Middle aged men aren't being cancelled on this thread.


Tbf Saunders didn't make it clear what she was driving at


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 9, 2022)

Interesting to rewind seven years and revisit this link from the op Prince Andrew named in underage 'sex slave' lawsuit over claims of forced sexual relations

How times have changed. The 'no truth to these claims' line has collapsed and we can see that either Andrew lied to his mother at the time or the queen is complicit in attempts to lie Prince Andrew named in US lawsuit over underage sex claims guardian link for those without an indy account

And one thing that's been largely omitted due to the focus on Andrew in this thread is that vg was trafficked for three years by epstein, that her abuse lasted longer and involved more men than just hrh. Andrew very much just the tip of the iceberg.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 9, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> Interesting to rewind seven years and revisit this link from the op Prince Andrew named in underage 'sex slave' lawsuit over claims of forced sexual relations
> 
> How times have changed. The 'no truth to these claims' line has collapsed and we can see that either Andrew lied to his mother at the time or the queen is complicit in attempts to lie


The DM story linked at the end of that article is very strange. A crisis management firm was suing Epstein over unpaid fees relating to the scandal over his links to the prince. 
You'd have thought that it would be Windsor suffering the reputational damage from association with Epstein rather than vice versa. So why was Epstein consulting a crisis management firm about it? Questions, questions.


----------



## Saunders (Jan 9, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> I'm not entirely sure what point you're making here but …. you'll get used to our black humour which bubbles up now and again on most any long thread.





weltweit said:


> You are probably right, but in defence of the thread, ….the space between action some irreverence is probably inevitable.


I wasn’t really making any point, just an observation. I also like black or irreverent humour but I haven’t found much of the humour on this thread terribly funny. It’s just all seems a bit blokey jokey, on a thread about sex trafficking. Which is a shame, as there are also interesting and informative posts and links. I’ve been looking on here for 2 or 3 years now, but don’t have much to say and probably should have kept my observation to myself, particularly as this is P&P and I don’t have anything useful or interesting to add and am def not looking for an argument.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 9, 2022)

Saunders said:


> I wasn’t really making any point, just an observation. I also like black or irreverent humour but I haven’t found much of the humour on this thread terribly funny. It’s just all seems a bit blokey jokey, on a thread about sex trafficking. Which is a shame, as there are also interesting and informative posts and links. I’ve been looking on here for 2 or 3 years now, but don’t have much to say and probably should have kept my observation to myself, particularly as this is P&P and I don’t have anything useful or interesting to add and am def not looking for an argument.


I'd be the last person to defend the quality of humour here, you just need to look at the new jokes thread to see how hit and miss it is. I thought you were talking about the couple of pages before your post which tbf for me mark a bit of a nadir on this thread. As for your length of membership I thought you'd pick up on the way there's a general view among many posters of anyone here for less than ~10 years as something of a newbie. Rather than keeping things to yourself post them, if you have stuck it out here for several years sure you've a lot of interest and use to add


----------



## maomao (Jan 9, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> a general view among many posters of anyone here for less than ~10 years as something of a newbie.


Less than 19 years = fucking n00b


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 9, 2022)

maomao said:


> Less than 19 years = fucking n00b


A common view I hear among posters of your vintage who were here while it was still cool


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 9, 2022)

Saunders said:


> and probably should have kept my observation to myself


It’d be rubbish if people felt their observations weren’t wanted.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 9, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> It’d be rubbish if people felt their observations weren’t wanted.


This.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 9, 2022)

On the 'jokes', I think they went into overdrive after the Maitlis interview and the 'can't sweat' stuff.  There was legitimate contempt for windsor there and, for me, a legitimate glee about someone so powerful being both on the end of a legal process and his own lies.  But beyond that, yeah, probably not what the thread should be about + yes too as to the middle aged bloke thing. But let's not ever drop the contempt for him and his ilk.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 9, 2022)

agricola said:


> isn't that abstracting electricity?


Best joke so far this year,


----------



## TopCat (Jan 9, 2022)

People can be many things. I have been here long enough to know there are several posters on this very thread who have had issues with bastards forcing themselves on them (myself included). Further seeing the downfall of such a shit as Andrew is a long awaited event for me. I was part of a group that put out a single on the day of his marriage calling for his death.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 9, 2022)

TopCat said:


> People can be many things. I have been here long enough to know there are several posters on this very thread who have had issues with bastards forcing themselves on them (myself included). Further seeing the downfall of such a shit as Andrew is a long awaited event for me. I was part of a group that put out a single on the day of his marriage calling for his death.


Yeh important not to forget the abuse so many people have suffered at the hands of men like prince andrew - good to see someone of his stamp brought to book

Turning to the song, it was a lovely song, better dead than wed


----------



## kenny g (Jan 9, 2022)

Andrew Windsor AKA Andrew Inverness 





						Andrew INVERNESS personal appointments - Find and update company information - GOV.UK
					

Free company information from Companies House including registered office address, filing history, accounts, annual return, officers, charges, business activity




					find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk


----------



## kenny g (Jan 9, 2022)

kenny g said:


> Andrew Windsor AKA Andrew Inverness
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Or Prince Andrew " naval officer"




__





						Andrew Albert Christian PRINCE ANDREW THE DUKE OF YORK KG KCVO ADC personal appointments - Find and update company information - GOV.UK
					

Free company information from Companies House including registered office address, filing history, accounts, annual return, officers, charges, business activity




					find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 9, 2022)

kenny g said:


> Andrew Windsor AKA Andrew Inverness
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## two sheds (Jan 9, 2022)

Also with responses - bear in mind that, particularly if just responding to New Posts, it's easy to just respond to the last post and forget what the thread is about.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 9, 2022)

That 2019 DM article linked in the tweet about Naples Gold is extraordinary. The Fail is really not a friend of Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, is it. 
'The stench' indeed.


----------



## elbows (Jan 9, 2022)

I see that artile also links him to a country that is in the news at the moment:



> A few years back, for example, leaked emails showed how he’d attempted to help a Greek sewerage company and a Swiss finance house bid for infrastructure projects in the corrupt Central Asian dictatorship of Kazakhstan, where he boasted friends in high places.
> 
> The deal eventually collapsed. But had it come off, he would have been paid a consultancy fee of almost £4 million.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 9, 2022)

elbows said:


> I see that artile also links him to a country that is in the news at the moment:


Yes. And what is implied between the lines, and legalled the hell out of, is left to our imagination.


----------



## UrbaneFox (Jan 9, 2022)

Is this true? Andrew Inverness? He has to cash in on everything and can't even come up with a decent pseudonym.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 9, 2022)

UrbaneFox said:


> Is this true? Andrew Inverness? He has to cash in on everything and can't even come up with a decent pseudonym.


According to Wikipedia “he is known by his secondary titles of Earl of Inverness and Baron Killyleagh, in Scotland and Northern Ireland respectively” (I imagine not widely, but officially).  Earls are referred to - it seems - by their given name plus the place of their title. So it’s not even a pseudonym. It’s one of his many names.  These people collect names as well as birthdays.


----------



## Dystopiary (Jan 9, 2022)

Andrew Twat.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 9, 2022)

Presumably 'soon' is up now and we'll hear if it goes to trail tomorrow?


----------



## Raheem (Jan 9, 2022)

Andrew Inverness is an anagram of "Andrew never sins".


----------



## Serge Forward (Jan 9, 2022)

Andrew Sweatlessnonce.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 9, 2022)

It’s also an anagram of sewer drains venn


----------



## Athos (Jan 9, 2022)

Nerviness warden?


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 10, 2022)

mango5 said:


> It doesn't to me. The responses to Saunders post are dismissive and patronising. Middle aged men aren't being cancelled on this thread.


I was in my twenties when this crime occurred. Andrew was 41. That I'm now middle aged as it's reaching trial I do find it somewhat galling that I'm now somehow placed in the same demographic as Andrew, and that being seen as negative even when I'm not supportive of him, simply by getting older. If my objection is 'patronising' then so be it. It's ludicrous.


----------



## mango5 (Jan 10, 2022)

The thread is not about you or your 'demographic'. The comment was one person's perspective on thread style and content. No 'weird identity politics'. Calm down dear.


----------



## Chilli.s (Jan 10, 2022)

Didn't know that you could start a company in a made up name. Must make the accounting easy though


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Jan 10, 2022)

Chilli.s said:


> Didn't know that you could start a company in a made up name. Must make the accounting easy though


Royals can do anything they want.  Cunts.


----------



## existentialist (Jan 10, 2022)

ElizabethofYork said:


> Royals can do anything they want.  Cunts.


I think we're watching an example of how that might not always be the case...


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Jan 10, 2022)

existentialist said:


> I think we're watching an example of how that might not always be the case...


Hope you're right.  However, I don't imagine the grand old Duke of pork will suffer the full penalty of the law.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2022)

ElizabethofYork said:


> Hope you're right.  However, I don't imagine the grand old Duke of pork will suffer the full penalty of the law.


He's already been condemned in the court of public opinion


----------



## existentialist (Jan 10, 2022)

ElizabethofYork said:


> Hope you're right.  However, I don't imagine the grand old Duke of pork will suffer the full penalty of the law.


I don't imagine life is exactly a bowl of roses for him right now. OK, so it's a particularly luxurious and well-found not-a-bowl-of-roses, but he seems to have all the disadvantages of being on public view with few of the advantages (eg, money). Perhaps some poetic justice is being done...


----------



## tim (Jan 10, 2022)

ElizabethofYork said:


> Hope you're right.  However, I don't imagine the grand old Duke of pork will suffer the full penalty of the law.


It's a civil case so presumably he'll get to pay compensation which will be paid out of the Queen's "private" income rather than the percentage of the Royal Estates income that she gets 









						Finances of the British royal family - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org


----------



## tim (Jan 10, 2022)

Dp


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2022)

tim said:


> It's a civil case so presumably he'll get a fine which will be paid out of the Queen's "private" income.


Fines are a criminal sanction, so DK why you mention them in a civil context. What will happen is compo and/or damages


----------



## Chilli.s (Jan 10, 2022)

Tax for the queen is optional, bus she pays it anyway as royals get away with so much more and it makes her look slightly less bad.

I wonder how they'd feel about paying tax at the rate everyone else has to


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2022)

Chilli.s said:


> Tax for the queen is optional, bus she pays it anyway as royals get away with so much more and it makes her look slightly less bad.
> 
> I wonder how they'd feel about paying tax at the rate everyone else has to


 It's not that long ago she agreed to pay income tax


----------



## Chilli.s (Jan 10, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> It's not that long ago she agreed to pay income tax


she does it out of the goodness of her heart, we are thankful and amazed by her kindness


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2022)

Chilli.s said:


> she does it out of the goodness of her heart, we are thankful and amazed by her kindness


----------



## tim (Jan 10, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> Fines are a criminal sanction, so DK why you mention them in a civil context. What will happen is compo and/or damages



Yes I realised that and corrected myself. It's Monday morning and in the real world I'm pretending to invigilate a rather pointless exam, so give me a break.


----------



## Dom Traynor (Jan 10, 2022)

Chilli.s said:


> Didn't know that you could start a company in a made up name. Must make the accounting easy though


Is it a made up name? Like Prince Harry was called Harry Wales in the forces. I thought they're allowed to style themselves in a number of different ways based on their titles or in Harry's case his dad's title.


----------



## Chilli.s (Jan 10, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


>


sorry if my sarcasm upset you

I'd actually put you in charge of taxation for royals in any way you saw fit


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 10, 2022)

Dom Traynor said:


> Is it a made up name? Like Prince Harry was called Harry Wales in the forces. I thought they're allowed to style themselves in a number of different ways based on their titles or in Harry's case his dad's title.


Yeah, it’s just one of those toff things, isn’t it? The Duke of Devonshire’s cheque book, if he still has one, won’t say Peregrine Cavendish, it’ll say Peregrine Devonshire.

We need to know these things so we can find them.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2022)

Chilli.s said:


> sorry if my sarcasm upset you
> 
> I'd actually put you in charge of taxation for royals in any way you saw fit


A head tax


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> Yeah, it’s just one of those toff things, isn’t it? The Duke of Devonshire’s cheque book, if he still has one, won’t say Peregrine Cavendish, it’ll say Peregrine Devonshire.
> 
> We need to know these things so we can find them.


All you need is the queen's address book


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 10, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> All you need is the queen's address book


Or Epstein’s.


----------



## Serge Forward (Jan 10, 2022)

I hereby declare myself as Serge Salford. By the way, like the queen, my mam has two birthdays, an official and unofficial one


----------



## tim (Jan 10, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> Yeah, it’s just one of those toff things, isn’t it? The Duke of Devonshire’s cheque book, if he still has one, won’t say Peregrine Cavendish, it’ll say Peregrine Devonshire.
> 
> We need to know these things so we can find them.


If you want to find them just look for the biggest house on the horizon.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jan 10, 2022)




----------



## 8ball (Jan 10, 2022)

Jeff Robinson said:


> View attachment 305320



It's the extra pic in the top left corner that makes it. 

Surely there's enough room top right for this:


----------



## Chilli.s (Jan 10, 2022)

That's a whole cooked baby being served up there, submerged in batter like a toad in the hole


----------



## Wilf (Jan 10, 2022)

Jeff Robinson said:


> View attachment 305320


Looks more like the Ark of the Covenant than a cake.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 10, 2022)

Oi, judge!


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Jan 10, 2022)

Chilli.s said:


> she does it out of the goodness of her heart, we are thankful and amazed by her kindness


Bless 'er


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 10, 2022)

Seems the debt on the chalet has now been paid, eking out that naval pension of his. A local had this to say…

Fergie and the princesses were photographed in the resort last week with their families.

One neighbour said: 'Maybe that was their last holiday here. To be honest the neighbourhood won't be too sorry to see the back of them. Once they turn up along comes all the paparazzi from Italy, France, Switzerland, you name it. 

'They are a nuisance blocking the roads and we often have to ask them to turn their engines off. They just sit there with fumes going everywhere polluting our beautiful mountain air.

'Plus, it's all rather seedy with Andrew bieng caught up in this sexual abuse scandal. That's not the image we want in Verbier.'


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 10, 2022)

kenny g said:


> Andrew Windsor AKA Andrew Inverness
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It's a dead company, dissolved in March last year.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 10, 2022)

equationgirl said:


> It's a dead company, dissolved in March last year.


The question is what assets it held while it was active, where they came from and to whom they were transferred, and why. Question*s*, I mean,


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 10, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> The question is what assets it held while it was active, where they came from and to whom they were transferred, and why. Question*s*, I mean,


Have you looked at the company accounts?


----------



## kenny g (Jan 10, 2022)

equationgirl said:


> Have you looked at the company accounts?


My theory was it was a bit of nothing agreed by one of Andrews "mates" with him at some point and the "mate" extended it for as long as humanly possible just for the kudos of being a fellow Director with a Prince. Once publicity was attracted the "mate" ditched it. Just goes to show how shallow Mr Inverness is that he agreed to it in the first place.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 10, 2022)

equationgirl said:


> Have you looked at the company accounts?


I haven't, but as it was a private company those details wouldn't be available anyway. It's a famous scandal that English private companies can be so secretive.


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 10, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> I haven't, but as it was a private company those details wouldn't be available anyway. It's a famous scandal that English private companies can be so secretive.


It's a condition of being a limited company. By law, accounts must be filed. If you go to the page for Naples Gold and click on Filing history you can see - and access for free - every document ever filed during the existence of the company, including the accounts. It was a dormant company for a while, so accounts information might be limited but it's still available.

I don't know why you think details won't be available for private companies.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 10, 2022)

equationgirl said:


> It's a condition of being a limited company. By law, accounts must be filed. If you go to the page for Naples Gold and click on Filing history you can see - and access for free - every document ever filed during the existence of the company, including the accounts. It was a dormant company for a while, so accounts information might be limited but it's still available.
> 
> I don't know why you think details won't be available for private companies.


I mean details of what their assets consisted of and who they were selling and buying from. Why don't you have a look?

ETA: sorry, that sounded snappy of me. Yes, obviously their accounts will be visible. But they will be so skeletal as to be meaningless.


----------



## 1927 (Jan 10, 2022)

equationgirl said:


> It's a condition of being a limited company. By law, accounts must be filed. If you go to the page for Naples Gold and click on Filing history you can see - and access for free - every document ever filed during the existence of the company, including the accounts. It was a dormant company for a while, so accounts information might be limited but it's still available.
> 
> I don't know why you think details won't be available for private companies.


It doesnt appear t have ever filed accounts with the exception of several returns for a dormant company which it appears to have been since its inception.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 11, 2022)

Prosecutors willing to drop Ghislaine Maxwell perjury charge if no retrial
					

Prosecutors make offer ahead of sentencing in effort to bring swift closure for the victims as Maxwell’s team push for new trial




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## scalyboy (Jan 11, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Oi, judge!


Innit. Judge Kaplan is certainly taking his sweet time. Keeping us all in suspense. Making us sweat.


----------



## seeformiles (Jan 11, 2022)

scalyboy said:


> Innit. Judge Kaplan is certainly taking his sweet time. Keeping us all in suspense. Making us sweat.



Indeed. I take comfort in the thought that Andrew’s blood pressure is through the roof and there’s a dangerously throbbing vein pulsing on his bloated Royal melon.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 11, 2022)

I can't find a legal definition of 'pretty soon'. The dictionary says that very soon means imminent. Pretty soon must therefore be slower But I was putting it as hours for a conservative estimation, not days.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> I can't find a legal definition of 'pretty soon'. The dictionary says that very soon means imminent. Pretty soon must therefore be slower But I was putting it as hours for a conservative estimation, not days.


168


----------



## kabbes (Jan 11, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> I can't find a legal definition of 'pretty soon'. The dictionary says that very soon means imminent. Pretty soon must therefore be slower But I was putting it as hours for a conservative estimation, not days.


If the full distribution of possible waiting times is the future life of the planet then anything within the next five years is incredibly fast.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 11, 2022)

The way the law works, 'soon' could be months rather than years.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 11, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> I can't find a legal definition of 'pretty soon'. The dictionary says that very soon means imminent. Pretty soon must therefore be slower But I was putting it as hours for a conservative estimation, not days.


I commend this precedent again to the thread, not entirely in jest: William Jennens - Wikipedia


----------



## danski (Jan 11, 2022)

Did anyone actually see the judge say “soon”?
They may have done air quotes.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2022)

two sheds said:


> The way the law works, 'soon' could be months rather than years.


in which case my answer would still be 168


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 11, 2022)

danski said:


> Did anyone actually see the judge say “soon”?






> Judge Kaplan told both parties he would make a decision on whether to dismiss the case against the Duke of York shortly.
> 
> He told the hearing: “I appreciate the arguments and the passion. You will have a decision pretty soon.”











						Andrew to find out 'soon' whether sex abuse civil case will go ahead, says judge | ITV News
					

The Duke of York's lawyers on Tuesday sought to throw out his accuser Virginia Giuffre's sexual abuse complaints against him. | ITV National News




					www.itv.com


----------



## two sheds (Jan 11, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> in which case my answer would still be 168





> __
> 
> 
> 
> ...





> Rule 168​
> *Being overtaken.* If a driver is trying to overtake you, maintain a steady course and speed, slowing down if necessary to let the vehicle pass. Never obstruct drivers who wish to pass. Speeding up or driving unpredictably while someone is overtaking you is dangerous. Drop back to maintain a two-second gap if someone overtakes and pulls into the gap in front of you.





> S.I. No. 168 of 2021 Health Act 1947 (Section 31A - Temporary Restrictions) (COVID-19) Regulations 2021​



?


----------



## kabbes (Jan 11, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Andrew to find out 'soon' whether sex abuse civil case will go ahead, says judge | ITV News
> 
> 
> The Duke of York's lawyers on Tuesday sought to throw out his accuser Virginia Giuffre's sexual abuse complaints against him. | ITV National News
> ...


Ah, then it is not very soon but pretty soon. 9 years at least.


----------



## Calamity1971 (Jan 12, 2022)

Ay up. Nonce to face civil sex case trial !


----------



## T & P (Jan 12, 2022)

Are you sweating yet, Andrew?


----------



## Spymaster (Jan 12, 2022)

He took his time.


----------



## seeformiles (Jan 12, 2022)

Wa-hey! 😎


----------



## brogdale (Jan 12, 2022)

Bad day in cuntland.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 12, 2022)

What dashed, bally bad luck old bean!


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 12, 2022)

A bit of brightness in an otherwise grim time. 👍


----------



## Athos (Jan 12, 2022)

Here.


----------



## chandlerp (Jan 12, 2022)




----------



## Wilf (Jan 12, 2022)

So, this time he'll be having a shitting weekend.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 12, 2022)

Given the approach so far by the briefs for the sweatless one I suspect this is going to get very nasty in court.  I wouldn't be surprised if a scorched earth approach is coming.  Its going to be grim.


----------



## RainbowTown (Jan 12, 2022)

Her Madge now weighing up the options...............


----------



## bemused (Jan 12, 2022)

Boris is probably doing a dance. When is the trial set for?


----------



## Wilf (Jan 12, 2022)

I'm just imagining the phone call: 'erm, mama, you know, when you said I couldn't have any more dosh...'


----------



## killer b (Jan 12, 2022)

Teaboy said:


> Given the approach so far by the briefs for the sweatless one I suspect this is going to get very nasty in court.  I wouldn't be surprised if a scorched earth approach is coming.  Its going to be grim.


isn't he coppering up right now to pay her off and avoid going to court altogether?


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 12, 2022)

killer b said:


> isn't he coppering up right now to pay her off and avoid going to court altogether?



Perhaps, that could be one interpretation of his recent financial dealings.  Another interpretation could be that he is divesting of assets in case he loses in court.

I suppose it could be both, he's divesting of his assets so he can justify a shit settlement offer.


----------



## MickiQ (Jan 12, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> He took his time.


Nah he didn't he decided 10 mins into the first hearing and then did naff all for a week to give the impression he was considering all the facts.


----------



## killer b (Jan 12, 2022)

Teaboy said:


> Perhaps, that could be one interpretation of his recent financial dealings.  Another interpretation could be that he is divesting of assets in case he loses in court.
> 
> I suppose it could be both, he's divesting of his assets so he can justify a shit settlement offer.


I'm just going on what his reported plans are tbh


----------



## two sheds (Jan 12, 2022)

MickiQ said:


> Nah he didn't he decided 10 mins into the first hearing and then did naff all for a week to give the impression he was considering all the facts.


or finding precedent to back up his already taken decision


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Jan 12, 2022)

MickiQ said:


> Nah he didn't he decided 10 mins into the first hearing and then did naff all for a week to give the impression he was considering all the facts.



Gave him time to sweat on it.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 12, 2022)

MickiQ said:


> Nah he didn't he decided 10 mins into the first hearing and then did naff all for a week to give the impression he was considering all the facts.



I see you are judging His honour by the standards of the average urbanite.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 12, 2022)

Prince Andrew will face civil trial over claims he had sex with Virginia Giuffre
					

The Duke of York will face a civil sex case trial after a US judge dismissed a motion by Andrew’s legal team to have the lawsuit thrown out




					www.mirror.co.uk
				




my word


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jan 12, 2022)

Ruling here: 



			https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/21177493/21cv6702-jan-11-2022-0900.pdf


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 12, 2022)

I may be alone in this but I'm kinda hoping it doesn't actually go to court and he settles, that is unless she wants her day in court or all his offers to settle are unacceptable to her.

His reputation is already in tatters, he's not coming back from this.  Settling out of court will just further shred what reputation has left.  If it does go to court I fear it could be really unpleasant for Virginia Giuffre and expensive legal types viciously going after a victim / survivor will be a nasty spectacle.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jan 12, 2022)

I hope his life is in tatters; if is he's guilty of what he has been accused of, he can  enjoy that should be coming to him.

No cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 12, 2022)

Teaboy said:


> I may be alone in this but I'm kinda hoping it doesn't actually go to court and he settles, that is unless she wants her day in court or all his offers to settle are unacceptable to her.



But the joy of the Platinum Jubilee with this whirring away in the background.


----------



## bemused (Jan 12, 2022)

Teaboy said:


> I may be alone in this but I'm kinda hoping it doesn't actually go to court and he settles, that is unless she wants her day in court or all his offers to settle are unacceptable to her.
> 
> His reputation is already in tatters, he's not coming back from this.  Settling out of court will just further shred what reputation has left.  If it does go to court I fear it could be really unpleasant for Virginia Giuffre and expensive legal types viciously going after a victim / survivor will be a nasty spectacle.


I'd rather not see his victim have to go through it. If he settles he won't have a reputation left, even if he wins people will still believe he did it.


----------



## Athos (Jan 12, 2022)

Worth noting that the judgement on the 2009 agreement was simply that the court couldn't kick the case out *at this stage*; he'll be able to argue that he's protected by its terms at any full trial, if it goes that far (which I doubt).


----------



## Athos (Jan 12, 2022)

bemused said:


> I'd rather not see his victim have to go through it. If he settles he won't have a reputation left, even if he wins people will still believe he did it.


Of course, she might want her day in court more than she wants any financial settlement. We shouldn't assume.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 12, 2022)

I lose track of his delaying tactics. He was trying to argue that Giuffre no longer domiciled in US therefore not entitled to sue in NY. Is the question of jurisdiction settled now?


----------



## elbows (Jan 12, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> I lose track of his delaying tactics. He was trying to argue that Giuffre no longer domiciled in US therefore not entitled to sue in NY. Is the question of jurisdiction settled now?


I think that line of defence was kicked out a little while before they moved onto the other issue that was dealt with today.


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 12, 2022)

Guess Andrew is going to trial









						Prince Andrew to face civil sex assault case after US ruling
					

Virginia Giuffre's claims against the Duke of York can continue to be heard, a US court says.



					www.bbc.co.uk
				




Good.


----------



## Athos (Jan 12, 2022)

No, I don't think that argument has seen heard yet. She's due to provide discovery on that issue in the next few days.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 12, 2022)

Just heard on the radio the ruling described as _a multi-faceted defeat for Windsor! _

Especially liked the judge's dismissal of his claim that he could not construct a defence against the claims without knowing what they were...said that if his position was one of denial, there was nothing he needed to know.


----------



## pseudonarcissus (Jan 12, 2022)

elbows said:


> I think that line of defence was kicked out a little while before they moved onto the other issue that was dealt with today.


Lawyers will generally exhaust legal defences before moving onto the facts. It's probably Andrew himself is just following advice here. There may be further technicalities come up..

I'm not quite sure what the accusation is here...it's not criminal statutory rape case (and I'm guessing the state of Florida are not sure they would get a conviction, and it would be for them to prosecute this).

They went after Maxwell on criminal charges for trafficking minors across state lines (a federal crime).

She is seeking financial damages in a civil case for him having sex with her when she was below the age of consent. I wonder if in a civil case, if he says the genuinely believed she was 18 at the time, that is any sort of mitigation.  One sort of assumes he is not an introspective type that wondered why girls were being "introduced" to him, or thinking to ask how old they were.

It would be very interesting to see if he sweats under deposition. He won't be able to not answer questions, or plead the 4th...and depositions can be very aggressive (I've been through it a few times as an expert in the federal courts). There is no judge there to ensure fair play...and it all gets transcribed. Bits that are objected to will be redacted and not used in the trial.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 12, 2022)

pseudonarcissus said:


> I wonder if in a civil case, if he says the genuinely believed she was 18 at the time, that is any sort of mitigation.



A tricky strategy given he has ‘no recollection’ of having met her and has suggested the photo is a forgery.


----------



## pseudonarcissus (Jan 12, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> A tricky strategy given he has ‘no recollection’ of having met her and has suggested the photo is a forgery.


indeed...but it's what he says in under oath in deposition and at trial that matters. I suspect he'll end up settling, maybe "on the court house steps" to avoid a trial. The depositions will give everyone a good sense of how strong the case is.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 12, 2022)

pseudonarcissus said:


> She is seeking financial damages in a civil case for him having sex with her when she was below the age of consent. I wonder if in a civil case, if he says the genuinely believed she was 18 at the time, that is any sort of mitigation.  One sort of assumes he is not an introspective type that wondered why girls were being "introduced" to him, or thinking to ask how old they were.
> 
> .



He's blown this chance when he did the Panorama interview.  He didn't say he didn't remember he explicitly stated there is no way it could have happened and listed several reasons as proof.  He basically called her a liar on TV over and over again.  I'm not sure coming out and saying _oh that girl, I thought we were talking about someone else.  Was she really under 18? _will work at any level as mitigation.


----------



## dessiato (Jan 12, 2022)

Out of interest, assuming he attends court and is questioned, does anyone think he will tell the truth? I suspect he'll be so arrogant as to assume everyone is beneath him and he can do, and say, as he chooses.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 12, 2022)

Teaboy said:


> He's blown this chance when he did the Panorama interview.  He didn't say he didn't remember he explicitly stated there is no way it could have happened and listed several reasons as proof.  He basically called her a liar on TV over and over again.  I'm not sure coming out and saying _oh that girl, I thought we were talking about someone else.  Was she really under 18? _will work at any level as mitigation.


Especially as it's a near certainty that the interview will be admitted in evidence.


----------



## UrbaneFox (Jan 12, 2022)

This news must have spoiled their well-earned winter break in the Swiss ski chalet. 

Let us hope that Princess Beatrice's husband has agreed to buy the place, so they will all be able to carry on as usual.


----------



## pseudonarcissus (Jan 12, 2022)

Teaboy said:


> He's blown this chance when he did the Panorama interview.  He didn't say he didn't remember he explicitly stated there is no way it could have happened and listed several reasons as proof.  He basically called her a liar on TV over and over again.  I'm not sure coming out and saying _oh that girl, I thought we were talking about someone else.  Was she really under 18? _will work at any level as mitigation.


they won't be playing the interview at the trial, and I'm sure the defence will be objecting to seating any juror who admits to having seen it.

I really don't see this going to trial unless it transpires she had fake ID or something (which is plausible).


----------



## MickiQ (Jan 12, 2022)

UrbaneFox said:


> This news must have spoiled their well-earned winter break in the Swiss ski chalet.
> 
> Let us hope that Princess Beatrice's husband has agreed to buy the place, so they will all be able to carry on as usual.



From his Wikipedia entry :-

 At the age of 23, with the support of his family,[16] he started Banda, a property development and interior design company, which claims to develop homes in "undervalued" parts of London.[16] This has been challenged by property experts on Twitter and _Forbes_, who argue that "there is nothing undervalued in Notting Hill", where Mapelli Mozzi's latest project is located, and describe the district as "a super prime residential destination".[17]

Am I the only one or does this sound 'iffy' to to anyone else? I suspect he might be up for buying the chalet.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 12, 2022)

He could have admitted to having sex with her but only in Britain, no, then denied any knowledge or even suspicion of the trafficking? 

Are they going after him for having sex with someone under 18 where that is illegal?


----------



## pseudonarcissus (Jan 12, 2022)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Are they going after him for having sex with someone under 18 where that is illegal?


yes, Florida.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 12, 2022)

pseudonarcissus said:


> yes, Florida.



I thought it was London, New York and Paedo Island?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 12, 2022)

Will this all be public once it starts ?


----------



## pseudonarcissus (Jan 12, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> I thought it was London, New York and Paedo Island?


The New York Age of Consent is 17 years old.

I stand corrected.


----------



## pseudonarcissus (Jan 12, 2022)

not-bono-ever said:


> Will this all be public once it starts ?


the trial will, not the depositions


----------



## Athos (Jan 12, 2022)

pseudonarcissus said:


> Lawyers will generally exhaust legal defences before moving onto the facts. It's probably Andrew himself is just following advice here. There may be further technicalities come up..
> 
> I'm not quite sure what the accusation is here...it's not criminal statutory rape case (and I'm guessing the state of Florida are not sure they would get a conviction, and it would be for them to prosecute this).
> 
> ...


Her civil claim against him is in respect of sexual assault and battery, and emotional distress.  Essentially, she's saying that she was compelled to have sex with him against her will, by him,  Epstein, and/or Maxwell, on a number of occasions, and, separately, that Andrew knew she was trafficked.

If there were to be criminal proceedings, they wouldn't be in Florida; she doesn't allege that he committed any crime there.

I don't think age of consent is the focus.  She says the sex began place when she was 17, which is the age of consent in NY.  She alleges also it took place in London, where it's 16, and the US Virgin Islands, where I think it might have been 18 (it is currently).  The things she's alleging - essentialy rape - would amount to crimes regardless of the victim's age; the legal significance of her age is that the claim would've been time barred had she not been under 18 at the time of the alleged crimes.

I think you the 5th, rather than the 4th.  And I think he might be able to rely on it to refuse to answer questions in a civil deposition, albeit that the court could draw an inference from that refusal (in the civil proceedings only).


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 12, 2022)

pseudonarcissus said:


> they won't be playing the interview at the trial, and I'm sure the defence will be objecting to seating any juror who admits to having seen it.



Is that really a given?  Wouldn't that be a matter for the judge to decide?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 12, 2022)

Well, that news has cheered me up.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 12, 2022)

pseudonarcissus said:


> The New York Age of Consent is 17 years old.
> 
> I stand corrected.



Where’s Palm Springs? Is that Florida? Because it could be argued that was where she was trafficked from.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 12, 2022)

"Virginia Giuffre's lawyer says she is "pleased that Prince Andrew’s motion to dismiss has been denied, and that evidence will now be taken concerning her claims against him".

In a statement released a short while ago, David Boies adds that his client "looks forward to a judicial determination of the merits of those claims".


----------



## LDC (Jan 12, 2022)

Someone wake me up when it's legal to make a big sign that says "Prince Andrew: definitely a nonce."


----------



## pseudonarcissus (Jan 12, 2022)

Teaboy said:


> Is that really a given?  Wouldn't that be a matter for the judge to decide?


yes, but they are funny about jury selection over there.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 12, 2022)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Someone wake me up when it's legal to make a big sign that says "Prince Andrew: definitely a nonce."


you can make such a sign now. best to have it made so you can display it the moment the nonce is found guilty.


----------



## pseudonarcissus (Jan 12, 2022)

Athos said:


> Essentially, she's saying that she was compelled to have sex with him against her will, by him,  Epstein, and/or Maxwell, on a number of occasions, a*nd that Andrew knew she was trafficked*.


...and he's not the brightest light on the road Christmas tree, by all accounts....I'm sure he's very capable of suspending his disbelief. it could be difficult for the prosecution to prove he knew.


----------



## pseudonarcissus (Jan 12, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> you can make such a sign now. best to have it made so you can display it the moment the nonce is found guilty.


it's civili litigation, so I suggest you add a footnote saying something about the balance of probabilities


----------



## krtek a houby (Jan 12, 2022)

equationgirl said:


> Guess Andrew is going to trial
> 
> 
> 
> ...



He's sweating now, reckon.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 12, 2022)

pseudonarcissus said:


> it's civili litigation, so I suggest you add a footnote saying something about the balance of probabilities


footnotes never look good on banners or posters


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 12, 2022)

krtek a houby said:


> He's sweating now, reckon.


good


----------



## pseudonarcissus (Jan 12, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Where’s Palm Springs? Is that Florida? Because it could be argued that was where she was trafficked from.


I think it's where the _alleged_ dirty deed took place that's important. it's a lower age for federal trafficking charges, I think, and not dependent on the age of consent at point of departure or arrival.


----------



## Athos (Jan 12, 2022)

pseudonarcissus said:


> ...and he's not the brightest light on the road Christmas tree, by all accounts....I'm sure he's very capable of suspending his disbelief. it could be difficult for the prosecution to prove he knew.


Yes, she's still got a lot to prove (albeit only on the balance of probabilities) to get home at trial. Won't be easy.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 12, 2022)

Athos said:


> Yes, she's still got a lot to prove (albeit only on the balance of probabilities) to get home at trial. Won't be easy.


fortunately the defendant is an arse who can be relied upon to make his sullied image look worse.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 12, 2022)

pseudonarcissus said:


> ...and he's not the brightest light on the road Christmas tree, by all accounts....I'm sure he's very capable of suspending his disbelief. it could be difficult for the prosecution to prove he knew.


I would have thought that it was the height of bad manners, and indeed simply not done at all under any circumstances, to mention where any of the girls came from. They were simply _there_. The royal was used to such things (more things than people to him, no doubt) simply being there, presented to him as if they were his right. 

If he were to admit to the sex but claim he didn't know about the trafficking, I'd be inclined to believe that bit could be true. He didn't know a) cos he's thick, b) cos he's an entitled twat who is used to being serviced, and c) cos, as you say, he didn't want to know, which was made easier by a) he's thick. 

Morally, of course, that doesn't let him off. He fucking well should have known. But legally it might. The Albert Speer defence. (Speer was lying, though.)


----------



## Athos (Jan 12, 2022)

pseudonarcissus said:


> they won't be playing the interview at the trial...


They might be allowed to play the interview for impeachment purposes if he makes an inconsistent statement under oath.  I suspect that's why she's seeking more detail about some of his harder to believe claims.


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 12, 2022)

Palm Springs is where she recruited, iirc 

The documentary, Jeffrey Epstein Filthy Rich has a lot of information, much from Virginia Guiffre herself, about the timeline. But I won't pretend it's an easy watch, and it does contain trigger warnings.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 12, 2022)

Teaboy said:


> He's blown this chance when he did the Panorama interview.  He didn't say he didn't remember he explicitly stated there is no way it could have happened and listed several reasons as proof.  He basically called her a liar on TV over and over again.  I'm not sure coming out and saying _oh that girl, I thought we were talking about someone else.  Was she really under 18? _will work at any level as mitigation.


Absurd as the 'no sweat' and pizza express defences were, I thought he must have _something _to back them up (doctored diary entries, verbal support from one of his flunkies, records from a dodgy doctor for the adrenaline thing etc).  That he hasn't got any of is really quite astonishing. Well, it's not astonishing as it's _not true_, but astonishing in that he would say those things publicly.  He genuinely thought this day would never come. Good.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 12, 2022)

pseudonarcissus said:


> The New York Age of Consent is 17 years old.
> 
> I stand corrected.


Yeah, but trafficking.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 12, 2022)

Wilf said:


> Absurd as the 'no sweat' and pizza express defences were, I thought he must have _something _to back them up (doctored diary entries, verbal support from one of his flunkies, records from a dodgy doctor for the adrenaline thing etc).  That he hasn't got any of is really quite astonishing. Well, it's not astonishing as it's _not true_, but astonishing in that he would say those things publicly.  He genuinely thought this day would never come. Good.


He is _exceptionally_ dim. He wouldn't survive any kind of court interrogation. They'll settle. They have no choice.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 12, 2022)

There is a much larger thing going on here then a court case.  Even if the Panorama interview isn't admissible as evidence does anyone really believe they could mount the defence that he didn't know she was under 18?

How would that look after everyone in the country had seen the interview?  He would be straight admitting that as a senior member of the royal family he told the country a total pack of lies.

The more I think about it the more I reckon this will never see the inside of a court room.


----------



## LDC (Jan 12, 2022)

Isn't there a baking competition for the Jubilee? Please can someone make a Royal your son's a paedo cake?


----------



## Wilf (Jan 12, 2022)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Someone wake me up when it's legal to make a big sign that says "Prince Andrew: definitely a nonce."


I'd start gathering the materials together right now.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 12, 2022)

littlebabyjesus said:


> He is _exceptionally_ dim. He wouldn't survive any kind of court interrogation. They'll settle. They have no choice.


But you can only settle with someone who wants to settle.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 12, 2022)

Wilf said:


> Absurd as the 'no sweat' and pizza express defences were, I thought he must have _something _to back them up (doctored diary entries, verbal support from one of his flunkies, records from a dodgy doctor for the adrenaline thing etc).  That he hasn't got any of is really quite astonishing. Well, it's not astonishing as it's _not true_, but astonishing in that he would say those things publicly.  He genuinely thought this day would never come. Good.


yeh it's this i think that will damn him. i would be rather surprised if he actually appears in the united states (i haven't been following with this with quite the assiduity it deserves, so maybe he's said he will). but it's the descent from 'i never met her and i can prove it' to 'you have to believe me i never met her' that will show the vacancy at the heart of his defence - that he's guilty as sin and has to mitigate rather than having the wherewithal to prove his innocence.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 12, 2022)

Wilf said:


> Absurd as the 'no sweat' and pizza express defences were, I thought he must have _something _to back them up (doctored diary entries, verbal support from one of his flunkies, records from a dodgy doctor for the adrenaline thing etc).  That he hasn't got any of is really quite astonishing. Well, it's not astonishing as it's _not true_, but astonishing in that he would say those things publicly.  He genuinely thought this day would never come. Good.



It’s because he’s stupid and his arrogance means he’s unwilling to listen to wiser heads.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 12, 2022)

Wilf said:


> I'd start gathering the materials together right now.


If you weren't fussed about the spelling you could start with some dough made from dried pea flour.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 12, 2022)

littlebabyjesus said:


> He is _exceptionally_ dim. He wouldn't survive any kind of court interrogation. They'll settle. They have no choice.



The thing about people who are exceptionally dim is that they have no idea, nor even the capacity to understand, exactly how dim they are.

I wouldn't trust his lawyers to provide sage counsel either. Not if they stand to make more money from a trial than from a settlement.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 12, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> If you weren't fussed about the spelling you could start with some dough made from dried pea flour.


first catch a bed sheet and spray paint. make stencils of the slogan you wish to paint, then using masking tape attach to the sheet. secure the sheet outside and using the spray paint fill in the stencils. wait a minute, remove the stencils and allow to dry flat


----------



## Funky_monks (Jan 12, 2022)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Isn't there a baking competition for the Jubilee? Please can someone make a Royal your son's a paedo cake?


To be fair, his dad groomed his mum so it's hardly unexpected.


But still, genuinely cheering news is so rare these days, so I'm making the most of this.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 12, 2022)

Raheem said:


> But you can only settle with someone who wants to settle.



But it’s also a gamble if she doesn’t.


----------



## Sprocket. (Jan 12, 2022)

If they get a move on they could start on the 30th January, the 373rd anniversary of Charles Stuart’s demise.


----------



## Athos (Jan 12, 2022)

Sprocket. said:


> If they get a move on they could start on the 30th January, the 373rd anniversary of Charles Stuart’s demise.


Sadly they don't file pretrial questionnaires until the end of July, so unlikely to be much before October (if it gets that far).


----------



## Raheem (Jan 12, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> But it’s also a gamble if she doesn’t.


Possibly one she feels safe taking, though.


----------



## danski (Jan 12, 2022)

If he goes to court, he should be made to wear no jacket and a blue shirt.


----------



## Sprocket. (Jan 12, 2022)

Athos said:


> Sadly they don't file pretrial questionnaires until the end of July, so unlikely to be much before October (if it gets that far).


374th anniversary then!


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 12, 2022)

Sprocket. said:


> 374th anniversary then!


i was at the movement against the monarchy do there on the 350th anniversary. there's some charles i society that has a meal in the banqueting hall every year to commemorate the glorious event.


----------



## Athos (Jan 12, 2022)

Raheem said:


> Possibly one she feels safe taking, though.


It's hard to see how she can; she has the burden of proof in a case that ultimately comes down to her words against his.  And where losing could expose her to losses in the millions.  It's possible she wants her day in court, but she'll have been advised how risky that it.   I suspect they'll both be keen to settle.


----------



## LDC (Jan 12, 2022)

Athos said:


> It's hard to see how she can; she has the burden of proof in a case that ultimately comes down to her words against his.  And where losing could expose her to losses in the millions.  It's possible she wants her day in court, but she'll have been advised how risky that it.   I suspect they'll both be keen to settle.



Plus the considerable costs of a legal team until the trial.


----------



## Athos (Jan 12, 2022)

Wilf said:


> Absurd as the 'no sweat' and pizza express defences were, I thought he must have _something _to back them up (doctored diary entries, verbal support from one of his flunkies, records from a dodgy doctor for the adrenaline thing etc).  That he hasn't got any of is really quite astonishing. Well, it's not astonishing as it's _not true_, but astonishing in that he would say those things publicly.  He genuinely thought this day would never come. Good.


I find it impossible to believe that he remembered the particular date of being in Pizza Express so many years after without any sort of documentation.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 12, 2022)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Plus the considerable costs of a legal team until the trial.


Is her lawyer still acting pro bono?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 12, 2022)

Raheem said:


> Possibly one she feels safe taking, though.


Can she afford to lose? 

I think her position is different. She (probably) can't afford to go to court and lose.

He can't afford to let it go to court, even if he were to win. 

Game of chicken regarding the amount to be paid, in which she is in a very strong negotiating position.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 12, 2022)

Athos said:


> I find it impossible to believe that he remembered the particular date of being in Pizza Express so many years after without any sort of documentation.


Without going back to the interview, I think he said something like 'we've checked back', which I took to mean his private office staff, perhaps with his lawyers.  If this does go to court, you'd imagine his daughter would eventually offer up a dodgy alibi, but who knows.  The daft thing is that a trip to Woking would still have given him time to go a-noncing at Tramp later that night.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 12, 2022)

A dare among his staff? 

_Say he was at Pizza Express in Woking. 50 quid if he believes you. _


----------



## Athos (Jan 12, 2022)

Wilf said:


> Without going back to the interview, I think he said something like 'we've checked back', which I took to mean his private office staff, perhaps with his lawyers.  If this does go to court, you'd imagine his daughter would eventually offer up a dodgy alibi, but who knows.  The daft thing is that a trip to Woking would still have given him time to go a-noncing at Tramp later that night.


It's unclear what those checks were, then, as he's already told the plaintiff (in response to discovery requests) he has no documentation in relation to the alleged alibi


----------



## TopCat (Jan 12, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> first catch a bed sheet and spray paint. make stencils of the slogan you wish to paint, then using masking tape attach to the sheet. secure the sheet outside and using the spray paint fill in the stencils. wait a minute, remove the stencils and allow to dry flat


Please, use a clean sheet.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 12, 2022)

TopCat said:


> Please, use a clean sheet.


and a flat sheet, not one of those elasticated monstrosities


----------



## Dystopiary (Jan 12, 2022)

Athos said:


> It's hard to see how she can; she has the burden of proof in a case that ultimately comes down to her words against his.  And where losing could expose her to losses in the millions.  It's possible she wants her day in court, but she'll have been advised how risky that it.   I suspect they'll both be keen to settle.


Surely it's possible that she has some evidence. Like she could be able to say if he had a [mole in a certain place] for example. Plus witnesses of sorts.


----------



## Athos (Jan 12, 2022)

Dystopiary said:


> Surely it's possible that she has some evidence. Like she could be able to say if he had a [mole in a certain place] for example. Plus witnesses of sorts.


Possibly.  But even that wouldn't necessarily prove she didn't consent to sex with him.

It's famously difficult to prove these sort of historic allegations.


----------



## RileyOBlimey (Jan 12, 2022)

During the civil trial of Epstein he was grilled about the shape of his nob.

Are we all ready to hear about Paedo Andy’s peculiar penis?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 12, 2022)

Athos said:


> Possibly.  But even that wouldn't necessarily prove she didn't consent to sex with him.
> 
> It's famously difficult to prove these sort of historic allegations.


it may be difficult to prove but imo andrew has done himself no favours by overstating his ability to disprove the allegations and the trend in direction has all been one way -> towards vg's version of events. so while i don't doubt it would be hard if not impossible to prove this _beyond a reasonable doubt_ i think that it wouldn't be nearly so difficult to get this over the _balance of probabilities _standard.


----------



## Dystopiary (Jan 12, 2022)

Athos said:


> Possibly.  But even that wouldn't necessarily prove she didn't consent to sex with him.
> 
> It's famously difficult to prove these sort of historic allegations.


Yeah.  Still he was adamant he wasn't there and she might be able to show that's not true.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 12, 2022)

Dystopiary said:


> Yeah.  Still he was adamant he wasn't there and she might be able to show that's not true.


he's adamant he can't sweat...


----------



## Dystopiary (Jan 12, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> it may be difficult to prove but imo andrew has done himself no favours by overstating his ability to disprove the allegations and the trend in direction has all been one way -> towards vg's version of events. so while i don't doubt it would be hard if not impossible to prove this _beyond a reasonable doubt_ i think that it wouldn't be nearly so difficult to get this over the _balance of probabilities _standard.


Yeah, I'm thinking having told people privately years ago her version of events would hopefully count for something, possible diary entries etc.


----------



## Athos (Jan 12, 2022)

Dystopiary said:


> Yeah, I'm thinking having told people privately years ago her version of events would hopefully count for something, possible diary entries etc.


Likely inadmissible as hearsay


----------



## Athos (Jan 12, 2022)

Dystopiary said:


> Yeah.  Still he was adamant he wasn't there and she might be able to show that's not true.


Did he deny meeting her, or was he careful to say he didn't have any recollection of having done so?

ETA:

'*PA: *I have no recollection of ever meeting this lady, none whatsoever.
...
*PA: *No, I have… I don't know if I've met her but no, I have no recollection of meeting her.'


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 12, 2022)

Dystopiary said:


> Yeah, I'm thinking having told people privately years ago her version of events would hopefully count for something, possible diary entries etc.


the dream would be andrew on the stand


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 12, 2022)

Athos said:


> Did he deny meeting her, or was he careful to say he didn't have any recollection of having done so?
> 
> ETA:
> 
> ...


"I have met so many compliant young ladies, how do you expect me to remember them all?"
Tbh, this would have been a more convincing defence at the outset.


----------



## Dystopiary (Jan 12, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> the dream would be andrew on the standard wing of a regular prison


ffy


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 12, 2022)

Dystopiary said:


> the dream would be andrew in a penguin


ffy


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 12, 2022)

Athos said:


> Did he deny meeting her, or was he careful to say he didn't have any recollection of having done so?
> 
> ETA:
> 
> ...


But also:


----------



## Athos (Jan 12, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> But also:
> 
> View attachment 305632


Yes, but that's a much wider allegation; there, he's denying having sex with her.  But I think he's been quite careful not to deny ever having met her.


----------



## RileyOBlimey (Jan 12, 2022)

Remember the burden of proof for a civil case in the US is not "Beyond a reasonable doubt" it is much lower. So, Andy is less likely to get away with it.


----------



## MickiQ (Jan 12, 2022)

Wilf said:


> Absurd as the 'no sweat' and pizza express defences were, I thought he must have _something _to back them up (doctored diary entries, verbal support from one of his flunkies, records from a dodgy doctor for the adrenaline thing etc).  That he hasn't got any of is really quite astonishing. Well, it's not astonishing as it's _not true_, but astonishing in that he would say those things publicly.  He genuinely thought this day would never come. Good.


I would lay good money he made them up on the spot during the interview.


----------



## Athos (Jan 12, 2022)

RileyOBlimey said:


> Remember the burden of proof for a civil case in the US is not "Beyond a reasonable doubt" it is much lower. So, Andy is less likely to get away with it.


That's not what burden of proof means. You're referring to the standard of proof.

The burden of proof rests with her to prove her claims (to the civil standard).


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 12, 2022)

RileyOBlimey said:


> Remember the burden of proof for a civil case in the US is not "Beyond a reasonable doubt" it is much lower. So, Andy is less likely to get away with it.


yeh we know and it's been chatted about above. most people here are used to it being the balance of probabilities in a civil case as opposed to the beyond reasonable doubt in a criminal trial.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 12, 2022)

Palm Springs is in California and has nothing to do with this, the action here was Palm Beach in Florida.

And is it less about age of consent but actual consent seeing as she was trafficked and made to have sex against her will, i.e. raped.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 12, 2022)

Athos said:


> Yes, but that's a much wider allegation; there, he's denying having sex with her.  But I think he's been quite careful not to deny ever having met her.


I did read the transcript, but how can he be sure it didn’t happen? How can he know, if he doesn’t remember?


----------



## Athos (Jan 12, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> I did read the transcript, but how can he be sure it didn’t happen? How can he know, if he doesn’t remember?


His position seems to be that he doesn't recall meeting her, but that he's sure he never slept with her.  Not a bad stance, given the possibility of witnesses coming forward to say they met, and given the fact the others are unlikely to have witnessed any sex.  Effectively makes his account hard to disprove.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 12, 2022)

Athos said:


> His position seems to be that he doesn't recall meeting her, but that he's sure he never slept with her.  Not a bad stance, given the possibility of witnesses coming forward to say they met, and given the fact the others are unlikely to have witnessed any sex.  Effectively makes his account hard to disprove.




The picture of him stood in the house of a sex trafficker, who incidentally is grinning in the background, with his arm around the bare waist of a woman trafficked for sex by the grinning madam, kind of balances the probabilities a bit.


----------



## Athos (Jan 12, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The picture of him stood in the house of a sex trafficker, who incidentally is grinning in the background, with his arm around the bare waist of a woman trafficked for sex by the grinning madam, kind of balances the probabilities a bit.


Hopefully.  But we shouldn't underestimate how hard it is to convince juries in these cases.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 12, 2022)

Athos said:


> Hopefully.  But we shouldn't underestimate how hard it is to convince juries in these cases.




If she wants to settle that’s her business and he’s utterly ruined anyway. But if her lawyers are doing some kind of no-win no-fee thing cos they are arch republicans or (more likely) will take a slice of her book/etc revenue, then why not reject a settlement and make the cunt truly pay for his crimes?


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 12, 2022)

Athos said:


> Hopefully.  But we shouldn't underestimate how hard it is to convince juries in these cases.


Do you reckon that with top flight SF attack lawyers the best will in the world a NY jury will come to this unprejudiced, prepared to believe that Windsor is as innocent as the next innocent man? Or do you think there may be some residual animus against the entitled attitudes of British royalty?


----------



## TopCat (Jan 12, 2022)

RileyOBlimey said:


> During the civil trial of Epstein he was grilled about the shape of his nob.
> 
> Are we all ready to hear about Paedo Andy’s peculiar penis?


yes


----------



## TopCat (Jan 12, 2022)

Athos said:


> Hopefully.  But we shouldn't underestimate how hard it is to convince juries in these cases.


I bet most over there hate him.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 12, 2022)

TopCat said:


> I bet most over there hate him.




It was his dad who killed Di, after all…


----------



## TopCat (Jan 12, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> It was his dad who killed Di, after all…


Nah just self entitled arrogant English snobby Royal rapes US kid and sneers rather than be accountable. Be like a bucket of stale piss thrown in the face of small c conservative America.


----------



## belboid (Jan 12, 2022)

It's not really true that VG will need to prove that the Paedo Prince fucked her knowing she had been trafficked. It's a civil case so 'all' she need show is that he is lying and that her version of events is highly plausible.

PP has two essential avenues of defence - deny all knowledge of anything, or admit he met her but didn't do _that_. If she can provide witnesses for any of her claims - most notably being at Tramps with him - then he would have to claim that he had simply forgotten, despite the fact that he explicitly claimed he was elsewhere, and could remember being elsewhere.  Show he is a liar and the rest of his testimony is effectively undermined - 'he's lied to the court once, so he is obviously willing to do so again and again.' 

I daresay the attempts to claim the renowned photo was a fake will be blamed on someone else, but the strength of his denials of recalling meeting her ever will count against him - "Why can't you remember?  Were there so many young girls you met in the company of paedophile Epstein and procurer Maxwell that you have forgotten this specific one?"

Any response will destroy what is left of his reputation. The story about him being in Pizza Express may not make it to the US court, but if he is made to say he was anywhere else (other than PE) he will be shown, in the court of public opinion, to be a brazen liar covering his arse in a way even Johnson would find embarrassing. His other option would be to go nuclear and do everything possible to destroy VG's reputation and claim that she is only in it for the money - "I'm a liar, but so is she." Probably not quite as bad for him as the previous option, but still a pretty shitty look.  Especially given his one and only skill is his ability to put his foot in his own mouth.

Given that any such witness statements or other evidence would be shown to his team well in advance of any trial, I suspect he'll be told to pay the fuck up quietly before anything comes to court. Another shitty look, but at least he is keeping The Family's name of the appalling vista or appearing in court.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 12, 2022)

I wonder if the lawyers will be seeking to get hold of talking points, practice videos, emails of feedback etc from whichever over-priced damage-limitation 'experts' the Glowing Gordonstounian hired to prep him for his Maitlis interview?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 12, 2022)

In ‘The Photo’ there are four people present. One says she was abused by one who says he wasn’t there. The photographer is thought to be dead, that leaves one other who could verify the claim by one of the other two people. A person who is facing the rest of her life inside. Wonder if she may be minded to say anything?


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 12, 2022)

Athos said:


> I find it impossible to believe that he remembered the particular date of being in Pizza Express so many years after without any sort of documentation.


If true, I suppose it's possible he was reminded by his daughter and/or her friend. Pizza express would be trivial to him but having a prince at your party won't have been for the friend. But as if they were sitting there at the same time Tramp was open. It's nonsense.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 12, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> If true, I suppose it's possible he was reminded by his daughter and/or her friend. Pizza express would be trivial to him but having a prince at your party won't have been for the friend. But as if they were sitting there at the same time Tramp was open. It's nonsense.




Pizza Express · Hours
65/67 Goldsworth Road, Woking GU21 6LJ
Closed · Opens tomorrow 11:30 am

Days of weekOpen hoursWednesday11:30 am - 10 pmThursday11:30 am - 11 pmFriday11:30 am - 11 pmSaturday11:30 am - 11 pmSunday11:30 am - 10 pmMonday11:30 am - 10 pmTuesday11:30 am - 10 pm


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 12, 2022)

Wilf said:


> Pizza Express · Hours
> 65/67 Goldsworth Road, Woking GU21 6LJ
> Closed · Opens tomorrow 11:30 am
> 
> Days of weekOpen hoursWednesday11:30 am - 10 pmThursday11:30 am - 11 pmFriday11:30 am - 11 pmSaturday11:30 am - 11 pmSunday11:30 am - 10 pmMonday11:30 am - 10 pmTuesday11:30 am - 10 pm


Exactly. If Tramp was even open at 11PM it would just be warming up.


----------



## Calamity1971 (Jan 12, 2022)

Just watching newsnight from earlier and Kirsty wark .... ' Coming up, the prince Charles sex case to go ahead'  5 mins in and no correction


----------



## Elpenor (Jan 13, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Palm Springs is in California and has nothing to do with this, the action here was Palm Beach in Florida.


A royal family member at a Palm Springs White Party would be a good story though


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Jan 13, 2022)

littlebabyjesus said:


> He could have admitted to having sex with her but only in Britain, no, then denied any knowledge or even suspicion of the trafficking?
> 
> Are they going after him for having sex with someone under 18 where that is illegal?


I'm fairly sure that having sex with a victim of trafficking is illegal irrespective of that age. If someone's been trafficked then there is no age of consent, so age of consent is a moot point.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 13, 2022)

AnnO'Neemus said:


> I'm fairly sure that having sex with a victim of trafficking is illegal irrespective of that age. If someone's been trafficked then there is no age of consent, so age of consent is a moot point.



That seems kind of odd.  So if someone is trafficked from A to B they lose their capacity to consent to sex with anyone?


----------



## belboid (Jan 13, 2022)

8ball said:


> That seems kind of odd.  So if someone is trafficked from A to B they lose their capacity to consent to sex with anyone?


That is essentially what _trafficked _means.   It doesn't mean given a lift someplace.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 13, 2022)

belboid said:


> That is essentially what _trafficked _means.   It doesn't mean given a lift someplace.



Trafficking for non-sexual exploitative means is possibly at least as common as for sexual exploitation (figures are fuzzy).

Let's just assume we are talking about trafficking for coerced sexual reasons and let that lie for now.


----------



## belboid (Jan 13, 2022)

8ball said:


> Trafficking for non-sexual exploitative means is possibly at least as common as for sexual exploitation (figures are fuzzy).
> 
> Let's just assume we are talking about trafficking for coerced sexual reasons and let that lie for now.


you seem to have a problem with the notion of 'against their will' and what that entails.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 13, 2022)

belboid said:


> you seem to have a problem with the notion of 'against their will' and what that entails.



<oops - grouchiness from me again - all I meant is what Athos has pointed out below>


----------



## Athos (Jan 13, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> ... if her lawyers are doing some kind of no-win no-fee thing cos they are arch republicans or (more likely) will take a slice of her book/etc revenue, then why not reject a settlement and make the cunt truly pay for his crimes?


The risk that she'll lose and have to pay his costs.


----------



## Athos (Jan 13, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> Do you reckon that with top flight SF attack lawyers the best will in the world a NY jury will come to this unprejudiced, prepared to believe that Windsor is as innocent as the next innocent man? Or do you think there may be some residual animus against the entitled attitudes of British royalty?


I suspect they'll have a mixture of prejudices, including those that typically prevent women who are victims of historic abuse getting justice.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 13, 2022)

Athos said:


> I suspect they'll have a mixture of prejudices, including those that typically prevent women who are victims of historic abuse getting justice.


Yeah, there is that. There's also the arguably stronger prejudice against entitled foreigners messing around with American girls.


----------



## Athos (Jan 13, 2022)

belboid said:


> It's not really true that VG will need to prove that the Paedo Prince fucked her knowing she had been trafficked. It's a civil case so 'all' she need show is that he is lying and that her version of events is highly plausible.


She will need to prove her case (to the civil standard).  It's possible she might show he lied whilst still failing to prove her case.


----------



## Athos (Jan 13, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> Yeah, there is that. There's also the arguably stronger prejudice against entitled foreigners messing around with American girls.


Fingers crossed!


----------



## Athos (Jan 13, 2022)

AnnO'Neemus said:


> I'm fairly sure that having sex with a victim of trafficking is illegal irrespective of that age. If someone's been trafficked then there is no age of consent, so age of consent is a moot point.





8ball said:


> That seems kind of odd.  So if someone is trafficked from A to B they lose their capacity to consent to sex with anyone?



A trafficked person can consent to sex, but her case is that she was forced to have sex with him, and that he did the forcing and/or knew she had been forced.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 13, 2022)

Athos said:


> The risk that she'll lose and have to pay his costs.




I reckon she’ll go with it, at least see how it pans out. Right now Douglas Bader has more legs to stand on than the paedo prince.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 13, 2022)

Last I heard, her lawyer was acting pro bono. Anyone know if that's still the case?


----------



## Athos (Jan 13, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I reckon she’ll go with it, at least see how it pans out. Right now Douglas Bader has more legs to stand on than the paedo prince.


I suspect it'll depend on what,  if anything, is offered (monetary and non-monetary), and when. Sadly well not know anything about that - won't be public.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 13, 2022)

Athos said:


> I suspect it'll depend on what,  if anything, is offered (monetary and non-monetary), and when. Sadly well not know anything about that - won't be public.




So long as the deal absolves me from any future parking tickets I’m good with that.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 13, 2022)

Maybe somebody has the answer to something that is confusing me at the moment.

We keep talking about the nonce giving evidence if it goes to trial and how disastrous he will be at it.  But as I remember it, he can’t go to the States without risking being immediately taken in for questioning.  So will they set up some kind of video link for evidence?  Or will he actually be unable to give evidence at all?


----------



## Athos (Jan 13, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> Last I heard, her lawyer was acting pro bono. Anyone know if that's still the case?


Last I heard Bois was waiving his $1,500 a day fees.  Probably keen to rehabilitate his image after representing Weinstein.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 13, 2022)

kabbes said:


> Maybe somebody has the answer to something that is confusing me at the moment.
> 
> We keep talking about the nonce giving evidence if it goes to trial and how disastrous he will be at it.  But as I remember it, he can’t go to the States without risking being immediately taken in for questioning.  So will they set up some kind of video link for evidence?  Or will he actually be unable to give evidence at all?




There is talk about video link.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 13, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> There is talk about video link.


By itself, that wouldn’t be a great look.  “The defendant can’t be in court himself today because if he sets foot in this country, the feds are going to arrest him for doing this  thing he is claiming he didn’t do”


----------



## Athos (Jan 13, 2022)

kabbes said:


> Maybe somebody has the answer to something that is confusing me at the moment.
> 
> We keep talking about the nonce giving evidence if it goes to trial and how disastrous he will be at it.  But as I remember it, he can’t go to the States without risking being immediately taken in for questioning.  So will they set up some kind of video link for evidence?  Or will he actually be unable to give evidence at all?


I think that'd be up to the judge.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 13, 2022)

kabbes said:


> By itself, that wouldn’t be a great look.  “The defendant can’t be in court himself today because if he sets foot in this country, the feds are going to arrest him for doing this  thing he is claiming he didn’t do”




Guess he can cite Covid and that, but as the news on all channels was keen reiterate, “there are no good options for Prince Andrew.” 😀


----------



## chandlerp (Jan 13, 2022)

Would people please stop referring to Palm Springs in regards this story?  It was Palm *Beach*


----------



## andysays (Jan 13, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> But also:
> 
> View attachment 305632


I don’t know about anyone else, but to me that reads like an explicit denial that *any* of it happened, not just the having sex bit at the end.


----------



## Athos (Jan 13, 2022)

andysays said:


> I don’t know about anyone else, but to me that reads like an explicit denial that *any* of it happened, not just the having sex bit at the end.


I think, in the context of the whole interview, it's clear he accepts that he may have met her at some point (albeit he does seem to suggest that, if he did, it wasn't in the night she alleges).


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 13, 2022)

kabbes said:


> By itself, that wouldn’t be a great look.  “The defendant can’t be in court himself today because if he sets foot in this country, the feds are going to arrest him for doing this  thing he is claiming he didn’t do”



I think because of this and his batshit TV interview I think should this go to court the chances of him giving evidence are slim.  I suspect they would rather go for a 'test the evidence' approach which would mean ripping into her.

It might not work but given his own press officer couldn't stop him doing that interview he would likely be an absolute loose cannon giving evidence.  His particular combination of extreme arrogance, total tone deafness and dim-wittedness would make it a very brave decision by any of his legal team to stick him on the stand.


----------



## Athos (Jan 13, 2022)

Teaboy said:


> I think because of this and his batshit TV interview I think should this go to court the chances of him giving evidence are slim.  I suspect they would rather go for a 'test the evidence' approach which would mean ripping into her.
> 
> It might not work but given his own press officer couldn't stop him doing that interview he would likely be an absolute loose cannon giving evidence.  His particular combination of extreme arrogance, total tone deafness and dim-wittedness would make it a very brave decision by any of his legal team to stick him on the stand.


He won't have the option of not giving evidence, exception on a question-by-question basis insofar as he pleads the fifth (from which the court may draw an inference in civil proceedings).


----------



## TopCat (Jan 13, 2022)

Virginia Giuffre ‘unlikely to accept purely financial settlement’ with Prince Andrew
					

Giuffre wants vindication of herself and her claims, says her lawyer David Boies




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## 8ball (Jan 13, 2022)

TopCat said:


> Virginia Giuffre ‘unlikely to accept purely financial settlement’ with Prince Andrew
> 
> 
> Giuffre wants vindication of herself and her claims, says her lawyer David Boies
> ...



That’s “game on” if ever I heard it.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 13, 2022)

andysays said:


> I don’t know about anyone else, but to me that reads like an explicit denial that *any* of it happened, not just the having sex bit at the end.


tbf it does say that he bought her drinks. Doesn't sound like him.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 13, 2022)

littlebabyjesus said:


> tbf it does say that he bought her drinks. Doesn't sound like him.


He doesn’t even know where bars are.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 13, 2022)

The pic of him running from paparazzi outside Tramp, wearing the same outfit as pictured with his accuser, lashing sweat. Can anyone use skills to date it?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 13, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> He doesn’t even know where bars are.


TBF he may get to have an intimate domestic appreciation for the location of bars in the not too distant.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 13, 2022)

I bet his chums list has shrunk a bit. Watch out for pics of him and Uri Geller on a boys night out soon.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 13, 2022)

DaveCinzano said:


> TBF he may get to have an intimate domestic appreciation for the location of bars in the not too distant.


In those circumstances, no use for his travel wear either.


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Jan 13, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> He doesn’t even know where bars are.


....which is pretty much the only statement from that interview that I actually believe.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 13, 2022)

Please note, mocking Andrew Inverness is not the same thing as finding the abuse he was part of a laughing matter.


----------



## surreybrowncap (Jan 13, 2022)

No: ed


----------



## chandlerp (Jan 13, 2022)

Athos said:


> He won't have the option of not giving evidence, exception on a question-by-question basis insofar as he pleads the fifth (from which the court may draw an inference in civil proceedings).


There's nothing to compel him to comply with any requests from a US civil court whatsoever.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 13, 2022)

surreybrowncap said:


> View attachment 305748



Oh dear.  Have you just posted a racist prison rape meme?


----------



## Athos (Jan 13, 2022)

chandlerp said:


> There's nothing to compel him to comply with any requests from a US civil court whatsoever.


Yes, and I've made the same point myself on this thread, in the past; I probably should have said that, if he's going to participate in the trial, he won't have the option...

Of course, if he doesn't participate, it'd mean judgement in default (and any subsequent enforcement issues).


----------



## Calamity1971 (Jan 13, 2022)

surreybrowncap said:


> View attachment 305748


No.


----------



## surreybrowncap (Jan 13, 2022)

Calamity1971 said:


> No.


Accepted. Apologies for any offence caused. Not intended.


----------



## MickiQ (Jan 13, 2022)

Athos said:


> Yes, and I've made the same point myself on this thread, in the past; I probably should have said that, if he's going to participate in the trial, he won't have the option...
> 
> Of course, if he doesn't participate, it'd mean judgement in default (and any subsequent enforcement issues).


I suspect there are people 'advising' him weighing those options, there's not only his lawyers there are going to be Brenda's advisors as well sticking their oar in. Their primary objectives may not be the same as HWCS's but probably very determined to make sure that no brown stuff sticks to Brenda and Chucky. They could be giving him one set of advice and his lawyers a different set which may be contradictory.
And of course he doesn't seem to be great at listening to advice anyway.


----------



## Athos (Jan 13, 2022)

MickiQ said:


> I suspect there are people 'advising' him weighing those options, there's not only his lawyers there are going to be Brenda's advisors as well sticking their oar in. Their primary objectives may not be the same as HWCS's but probably very determined to make sure that no brown stuff sticks to Brenda and Chucky. They could be giving him one set of advice and his lawyers a different set which may be contradictory.
> And of course he doesn't seem to be great at listening to advice anyway.


Could be.  Imagine if he's keen to settle (because he thinks a conviction is likely), but the Queen's like "no way, you're type me you're innocent so get over there and prove it; the family doesn't want the shame of a settlement."


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 13, 2022)

Athos said:


> Could be.  Imagine if he's keen to settle (because he thinks a conviction is likely), but the Queen's like "no way, you're type me you're innocent so get over there and prove it; the family doesn't want the shame of a settlement."


The traditional British royal family response to any kind of allegation used to be total silence. Bet he wishes he'd stuck to tradition.


----------



## A380 (Jan 13, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> Do you reckon that with top flight SF attack lawyers the best will in the world a NY jury will come to this unprejudiced, prepared to believe that Windsor is as innocent as the next innocent man? Or do you think there may be some residual animus against the entitled attitudes of British royalty?


Loads of septics love the royals more than we do. Don’t know why, but they do. Perhaps it’s because they don’t have to pay for them anymore?


----------



## TopCat (Jan 13, 2022)

Prince Andrew loses military roles and use of HRH title
					

Queen also strips royal patronages from duke, who will fight US sexual assault lawsuit as private citizen




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 13, 2022)

Can't vouch for the authenticity of this, but all seems to fit the known facts...


----------



## dessiato (Jan 13, 2022)

TopCat said:


> Prince Andrew loses military roles and use of HRH title
> 
> 
> Queen also strips royal patronages from duke, who will fight US sexual assault lawsuit as private citizen
> ...


Let me make it clear, I think he's guilty, on the balance of probabilities, and I readily condemn anyone who abuses others

It seems a little sad that someone who could, if he'd been a decent and honourable man, have done so much good for the forces on the back of his experience.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 13, 2022)

TopCat said:


> The pic of him running from paparazzi outside Tramp, wearing the same outfit as pictured with his accuser, lashing sweat. Can anyone use skills to date it?


Carbon dating?


----------



## TopCat (Jan 13, 2022)

Wilf said:


> Carbon dating?


It will have been in the press. Where/when was it first published anyone?


----------



## planetgeli (Jan 13, 2022)

TopCat said:


> Prince Andrew loses military roles and use of HRH title
> 
> 
> Queen also strips royal patronages from duke, who will fight US sexual assault lawsuit as private citizen
> ...



Well that took about 20 minutes. He's now Andrew Windsor or whatever his surname is. Private citizen.


----------



## platinumsage (Jan 13, 2022)

What’s next? An act of parliament to remove him from the line of succession?


----------



## steveseagull (Jan 13, 2022)

Military titles and HRH removed with the blessing of the Queen.

She just needs to remove his head now.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 13, 2022)

Well played by _Republic:

_


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 13, 2022)

He's becoming a former person.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 13, 2022)

Symbolic and all that, but chip, chip...


----------



## brogdale (Jan 13, 2022)

Teaboy said:


> He's becoming a former person.


We can but aspire.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 13, 2022)

planetgeli said:


> Well that took about 20 minutes. He's now Andrew Windsor or whatever his surname is. Private citizen.


Well, not quite. He’s still the Duke of York.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 13, 2022)

A good news day.


----------



## T & P (Jan 13, 2022)




----------



## planetgeli (Jan 13, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> Well, not quite. He’s still the Duke of York.



Whatever that is. Means nothing to me apart from someone marching up a hill.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 13, 2022)

"this case".


----------



## brogdale (Jan 13, 2022)

My goodness, what with Chinese (communist) spies and Paedo princes under the bus...anyone would think that the establishment are desperate to rearrange the news agenda.


----------



## Brainaddict (Jan 13, 2022)

Hehe, so Lizzie's been forced to cut him loose. Second major member of family lost to the formal roles in two years. It looks almost careless. I'd love it if her much-praised guardianship of the royal family's status fell apart in the fading years of her reign.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 13, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> Please note, mocking Andrew Inverness is not the same thing as finding the abuse he was part of a laughing matter.


Some people are deliberately obtuse.


----------



## Brainaddict (Jan 13, 2022)

brogdale said:


> My goodness, what with Chinese (communist) spies and Paedo princes under the bus...anyone would think that the establishment are desperate to rearrange the news agenda.


"The establishment are conspiring to keep [shit thing] out of the news by running stories on [other shit thing]" is my least favourite leftist social media take. It attributes way too much coordination to the different sections of the establishment, and in most circumstances assumes too much ability to control when things get released. It's leftie conspiracy theory basically.


----------



## teqniq (Jan 13, 2022)

brogdale said:


> My goodness, what with Chinese (communist) spies and Paedo princes under the bus...anyone would think that the establishment are desperate to rearrange the news agenda.


Pretty much. The story originally dates back to 2015.


----------



## Dandred (Jan 13, 2022)

Prince Andrew loses military titles and use of HRH
					

It comes as the prince faces a US civil case over claims he sexually assaulted a woman when she was 17.



					www.bbc.com


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 13, 2022)

With the withdrawal of the hrh the queen shows she thinks her son guilty as sin


----------



## pseudonarcissus (Jan 13, 2022)

dessiato said:


> It seems a little sad that someone who could, if he'd been a decent and honourable man, have done so much good for the forces on the back of his experience.


Everyone I ever spoke to who was in the Falklands with him utterly detested him.


----------



## andysays (Jan 13, 2022)

I'm trying to think if there's any precedent for this removal of the HRH title.

Nothing I can remember, but maybe someone here will know different.


----------



## LDC (Jan 13, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> With the withdrawal of the hrh the queen shows she thinks her son guilty as sin



Yeah, I said yesterday that I think the sign he's long term no-coming-back properly fucked will be the withdrawal of his honorary military titles. I didn't expect it to happen so soon though. And yes, not the sign of someone that thinks their son is completely innocent.


----------



## tommers (Jan 13, 2022)

Dandred said:


> Prince Andrew loses military titles and use of HRH
> 
> 
> It comes as the prince faces a US civil case over claims he sexually assaulted a woman when she was 17.
> ...


that isn't a good look for the trial.


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Jan 13, 2022)

andysays said:


> I'm trying to think if there's any precedent for this removal of the HRH title.
> 
> Nothing I can remember, but maybe someone here will know different.


Sarah Ferguson had her HRH removed i think.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 13, 2022)

andysays said:


> I'm trying to think if there's any precedent for this removal of the HRH title.
> 
> Nothing I can remember, but maybe someone here will know different.


Yup, I think there’s been a couple of notable ones in recent times.


----------



## Gromit (Jan 13, 2022)

andysays said:


> I'm trying to think if there's any precedent for this removal of the HRH title.
> 
> Nothing I can remember, but maybe someone here will know different.


During the French Revolution many a royal had their titles removed... Along with their heads.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 13, 2022)

andysays said:


> I'm trying to think if there's any precedent for this removal of the HRH title.
> 
> Nothing I can remember, but maybe someone here will know different.


His ex wife Fergie had HRH taken away after sucking John Bryan's toes and licking his anus on TV.


----------



## bemused (Jan 13, 2022)

I wonder if he's done this so he can go to trial?


----------



## Dystopiary (Jan 13, 2022)

The arsehole formerly known as Prince (Andrew).


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Jan 13, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> Yup, I think there’s been a couple of notable ones in recent times.


Diana for one....(I think)


----------



## Raheem (Jan 13, 2022)

He was a colonel in eight different army regiments! Imagine the time and effort he must have spent working his way up through the ranks.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 13, 2022)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Yeah, I said yesterday that I think the sign he's long term no-coming-back properly fucked will be the withdrawal of his honorary military titles. I didn't expect it to happen so soon though. And yes, not the sign of someone that thinks their son is completely innocent.


The military thing,thought they'd gone already. But the unkindest cut of all the hrh withdrawal, the first clear step to sending him to join the former people


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 13, 2022)

Raheem said:


> He was a colonel in eight different army regiments! Imagine the time and effort he must have spent working his way up through the ranks.


And now he's struck off the rolls of them all


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 13, 2022)

A380 said:


> Loads of septics love the royals more than we do. Don’t know why, but they do. Perhaps it’s because they don’t have to pay for them anymore?



They love the theatre and pomp. I imagine they’re less enthused with the noncery.


----------



## andysays (Jan 13, 2022)

ElizabethofYork said:


> Sarah Ferguson had her HRH removed i think.





TopCat said:


> His ex wife Fergie had HRH taken away...



True soul mates, obviously


----------



## steveseagull (Jan 13, 2022)

Now he has had his HRH removed are NonceRover going to remove his motor?


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 13, 2022)

Brainaddict said:


> Hehe, so Lizzie's been forced to cut him loose. Second major member of family lost to the formal roles in two years. It looks almost careless. I'd love it if her much-praised guardianship of the royal family's status fell apart in the fading years of her reign.



Charles has always argued for a slimmer Royal Family. Harry was probably prudent in making the jump where as Andrew is just entitled yet stupid.


----------



## Idris2002 (Jan 13, 2022)

Next week: overnight stay with a bottle of whiskey and loaded revolver?


----------



## LDC (Jan 13, 2022)

Idris2002 said:


> Next week: overnight stay with a bottle of whiskey and loaded revolver?



Can you imagine if he genuinely did have some sort of accident and died now?! Tripped over a corgi and down the stairs?! Conspiracy heads will explode!


----------



## Sprocket. (Jan 13, 2022)

Idris2002 said:


> Next week: overnight stay with a bottle of whiskey and loaded revolver?


I wonder if, with hindsight he wishes an Exocet had taken him out.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 13, 2022)

Imagine being born into unimaginable privilege and being bestowed with awards you didn’t deserve and then just being that stupid that you couldn’t keep hold of that.


----------



## T & P (Jan 13, 2022)

I've just got to read the open letter they sent to the Queen. Curt as fuck, within the remit of addressing the Head of State anyway 



			https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/republic/pages/432/attachments/original/1642074993/military_letter_to_the_Queen_Jan_2022.pdf?1642074993
		


I also like how the letter is addressed: 'The Queen, Buckingham Palace...' . No 'H.M. The Queen Elizabeth II', or similar tripe you would have expected


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 13, 2022)

So Brenda's officially thrown her favourite son under the bus. Season eight of The Crown is gonna be a belter.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 13, 2022)

SpookyFrank said:


> So Brenda's officially thrown her favourite son under the bus. Season eight of The Crown is gonna be a belter.



I don’t think the Crown will cover current times. Not to worry though, it’s plenty entertaining in real time.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 13, 2022)

SpookyFrank said:


> So Brenda's officially thrown her favourite son under the bus. Season eight of The Crown is gonna be a belter.


What kind of total cunt has a “favourite son” anyway?


----------



## dessiato (Jan 13, 2022)

SpookyFrank said:


> So Brenda's officially thrown her favourite son under the bus. Season eight of The Crown is gonna be a belter.


I've never watched it, but I might now.


----------



## LDC (Jan 13, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Imagine being born into unimaginable privilege and being bestowed with awards you didn’t deserve and then just being that stupid that you couldn’t keep hold of that.



Yeah, like literally all you have to do is breathe and swan about, and just not do a short list of dodgy things, and he couldn't even manage that.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 13, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> What kind of total cunt has a “favourite son” anyway?


Someone who has one son.


----------



## existentialist (Jan 13, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> With the withdrawal of the hrh the queen shows she thinks her son guilty as sin


My money's on some heart problem being discovered. As to the severity...who knows?


----------



## maomao (Jan 13, 2022)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Can you imagine if he genuinely did have some sort of accident and died now?! Tripped over a corgi and down the stairs?! Conspiracy heads will explode!


They'll be even worse if the state kills him and tries to cover it up.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 13, 2022)

T & P said:


> I've just got to read the open letter they sent to the Queen. Curt as fuck, within the remit of addressing the Head of State anyway
> 
> 
> 
> ...


And that it's sent from "c/o Republic"


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 13, 2022)

Well at least he can hole up in his ski chalet until this all blows over. Oh wait...


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 13, 2022)

So, he keeps his 'His Royal Highness' title, but will stop using it in any official capacity.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 13, 2022)

Raheem said:


> Someone who has one son.


What are you saying? 😱


----------



## friedaweed (Jan 13, 2022)

Idris2002 said:


> Next week: overnight stay with a bottle of whiskey and loaded revolver?


Pretty much this really. Not that I'd advocate anyone taking their own life but you can see it coming.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 13, 2022)

Raheem said:


> Someone who has one son.




Like Charles does.


----------



## LDC (Jan 13, 2022)

friedaweed said:


> Pretty much this really. Not that I'd advocate anyone taking their own life but you can see it coming.



I'm not sure. I think that would mean he has some self awareness and acceptance that he'd done something wrong, and there's no sign of that at all.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 13, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Like Charles does.


Nice of you that be optimistic for him.


----------



## A380 (Jan 13, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> What kind of total cunt has a “favourite son” anyway?


I have, and also a favourite daughter.


----------



## redcogs (Jan 13, 2022)

The entertainment value of the bbc news programs, normally very dire indeed, have taken a significant upward swing in the last 24 hours, and these tired old ears have begun to jangle with delight! Thatcher has died, Boris is dying, and Andy Windsor is skulking in shadows partially stripped of title and 'privilege'.    Does it get any better?


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 13, 2022)

T & P said:


> I've just got to read the open letter they sent to the Queen. Curt as fuck, within the remit of addressing the Head of State anyway
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Looking at the list of signatories and it seems the armed forces has a surfeit of Brians


----------



## friedaweed (Jan 13, 2022)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> I'm not sure. I think that would mean he has some self awareness and acceptance that he'd done something wrong, and there's no sign of that at all.


Yeah I agree with that on his outward projection but he must realise after his telly cockup he ain't no Petrocelli. He must know he's bang to rights now the case is going to run all the way. 

His  only cowardly option is a no show, settle. which currently doesn't look like an option or fight it.

Hes got nowhere to hide really other than turning the lights off himself.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 13, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> What kind of total cunt has a “favourite son” anywa





Although you're better off not being his favourite, not unless getting nailed to things is your idea of a fun weekend.


----------



## friedaweed (Jan 13, 2022)

redcogs said:


> The entertainment value of the bbc news programs, normally very dire indeed, have taken a significant upward swing in the last 24 hours, and these tired old ears have begun to jangle with delight! Thatcher has died, Boris is dying, and Andy Windsor is skulking in shadows partially stripped of title and 'privilege'.    Does it get any better?


Liverpool could sort out Mo Salah's contract and yeah, perfect week.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 13, 2022)

A380 said:


> I have, and also a favourite daughter.


Because you have one of each.  I have two daughters.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 13, 2022)

I thought the revolution was as going to be a spark, an outpouring of centuries of resentment and an orgy of justified violence. Not like this


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 13, 2022)

Boo


----------



## Raheem (Jan 13, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> Because you have one of each.  I have two daughters.


So pick someone else's son to be your favourite! Talk about first-world problems...


----------



## A380 (Jan 13, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> Because you have one of each.  I have two daughters.


You could get them to do more washing up and gardening if you tell them you do have a favourite....


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 13, 2022)

Seems Brenda hands the military tiles out and she takes them back and that she'll be handing them out again. I'll give being a Colonel a stab, seems easy enough, I did once date a woman who spent two years in the army cadets in North Yorkshire, so I am eminently qualified. And most importantly, whilst there was the odd youthful dalliance with pills and powders, I have never raped anyone.


----------



## friedaweed (Jan 13, 2022)

I let my kids fight over it. I get better presents that way.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 13, 2022)

Does he still get a free house from his ma? It's not a house, but a 'lodge'. No, not a caravan on the Isle of Wight, not that kind of lodge, this is it...




Lodge.


----------



## MickiQ (Jan 13, 2022)

When Youngest phones home from Uni at weekends, she announces herself by name or simply 'me', however twice she has begun by saying "Hi Dad This is Your Baby Girl". On both occassions a request for a financial subsidy has quickly followed.


----------



## donkyboy (Jan 13, 2022)

Next we need the "Duke of York" title removed.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 13, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Does he still get a free house from his ma? It's not a house, but a 'lodge'. No, not a caravan on the Isle of Wight, not that kind of lodge, this is it...
> 
> View attachment 305784
> 
> ...



Is that in Windsor Great Park?

I hope so, because one of the lakes there is called Virginia Water.


----------



## friedaweed (Jan 13, 2022)

MickiQ said:


> When Youngest phones home from Uni at weekends, she announces herself by name or simply 'me', however twice she has begun by saying "Hi Dad This is Your Baby Girl". On both occassions a request for a financial subsidy has quickly followed.


When mine was at University she used to phone the day after I got paid. She got away with it for a whole year too until I looked at the call register 🤣


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 13, 2022)

Raheem said:


> So pick someone else's son to be your favourite! Talk about first-world problems...


That’s easy! Maomao’s laddie!


----------



## friedaweed (Jan 13, 2022)

donkyboy said:


> Next we need the "Duke of York" title removed.


Is there a town that rhymes with Nonce ?


----------



## a_chap (Jan 13, 2022)

TopCat said:


> His ex wife Fergie had HRH taken away ...



"HRH"?

You mean Her Royal Hemorrhoids...?



Dystopiary said:


> The arsehole formerly known as Prince (Andrew).



QED


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 13, 2022)

friedaweed said:


> Is there a town that rhymes with Nonce ?


France?


----------



## belboid (Jan 13, 2022)

friedaweed said:


> Is there a town that rhymes with Nonce ?


he could be the Duke of Toledo


----------



## friedaweed (Jan 13, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> France?


I cant see them taking him off York's hands really.


----------



## pseudonarcissus (Jan 13, 2022)

belboid said:


> he could be the Duke of Toledo


That would be a triumph


----------



## elbows (Jan 13, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Does he still get a free house from his ma? It's not a house, but a 'lodge'. No, not a caravan on the Isle of Wight, not that kind of lodge, this is it...
> 
> Lodge.


Black Lodge


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 13, 2022)

friedaweed said:


> I cant see them taking him off York's hands really.


You raise a good point, though: what do the people of York think? Has anyone asked them?


----------



## Raheem (Jan 13, 2022)

friedaweed said:


> Is there a town that rhymes with Nonce ?


Not exactly a rhyme, but there's Nancy if you say it in a French accent.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 13, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> You raise a good point, though: what do the people of York think? Has anyone asked them?


Hard to imagine how they will cope without a duke to guide them, TBF.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 13, 2022)

Raheem said:


> Hard to imagine how they will cope without a Duke to guide them, TBF.


Edinburgh has been all over the place, tbh.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 13, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> Edinburgh has been all over the place, tbh.


Liked, although it still has a duke.


----------



## spitfire (Jan 13, 2022)

Nantes. HTH.


----------



## Sprocket. (Jan 13, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> Edinburgh has been all over the place, tbh.


Edward will be named the Duke of Edinburgh shortly, he’s the only monarch’s son to be an Earl at the moment.
The queen will be pissed off because the previous Duke of York was her father.


----------



## existentialist (Jan 13, 2022)

MickiQ said:


> When Youngest phones home from Uni at weekends, she announces herself by name or simply 'me', however twice she has begun by saying "Hi Dad This is Your Baby Girl". On both occassions a request for a financial subsidy has quickly followed.


"...let me just stop you there. I don't know if you'd noticed, but when you introduce yourself as my "baby girl", a request for money usually ensues. Just thought you should know. Now, what can I do for you?"


----------



## Raheem (Jan 13, 2022)

spitfire said:


> Nantes. HTH.


That's the same at the beginning and different at the end. It's an anti-rhyme.


----------



## davesgcr (Jan 13, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Does he still get a free house from his ma? It's not a house, but a 'lodge'. No, not a caravan on the Isle of Wight, not that kind of lodge, this is it...
> 
> View attachment 305784
> 
> ...



Comes with two butlers and a valet apparently , plus a considerable police guard. Must be scope for some cost savings then. (BTW - it is the place where the Queen Mother lived till she passed on)


----------



## spitfire (Jan 13, 2022)

Raheem said:


> That's the same at the beginning and different at the end. It's an anti-rhyme.



Non.

Nawnts

It's not perfect French but you'd get away with it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 13, 2022)

Sprocket. said:


> Edward will be named the Duke of Edinburgh shortly, he’s the only monarch’s son to be an Earl at the moment.
> The queen will be pissed off because the previous Duke of York was her father.


I wonder if she's had a shouting match with Andrew, wondering where she went wrong and flinging priceless vases at the depraved duke's head


----------



## existentialist (Jan 13, 2022)

davesgcr said:


> Comes with two butlers and a valet apparently , plus a considerable police guard. Must be scope for some cost savings then. (BTW - it is the place where the Queen Mother lived till she passed on)


To someone as entitled as him, that might as well be prison.

That's one of the downsides of living at the lofty heights...you don't have to fall far to be extremely deprived, relatively speaking. Ahahaha, "relatively".


----------



## Sprocket. (Jan 13, 2022)

He could be the Duke of Rochdale or Rotherham.


----------



## existentialist (Jan 13, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> I wonder if she's had a shouting match with Andrew, wondering where she went wrong and flinging priceless vases at the depraved duke's head


I rather hope it was far more forensically clinical. I imagine he is in absolutely no doubt as to how many of the seven canonical varieties of shit he is in as far as she is concerned.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 13, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> You raise a good point, though: what do the people of York think? Has anyone asked them?


They're furious that the duke is a nonce and feel, fairly or unfairly, that it reflects on them. A recall petition will be launched in the next day or two to demand the queen relieve Andrew of his dukedom


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 13, 2022)

Sprocket. said:


> He could be the Duke of Rochdale or Rotherham.


Protests have been held in both places after a rumour to this effect ran through the towns


----------



## redcogs (Jan 13, 2022)

Is there a statue anywhere that is in need of attention from the Bristol contingent?


----------



## Sprocket. (Jan 13, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> They're furious that the duke is a nonce and feel, fairly or unfairly, that it reflects on them. A recall petition will be launched in the next day or two to demand the queen relieve Andrew of his dukedom


Eric Bloodaxe would be seething!


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 13, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> They're furious that the duke is a nonce and feel, fairly or unfairly, that it reflects on them. A recall petition will be launched in the next day or two to demand the queen relieve Andrew of his dukedom


🤞


----------



## friedaweed (Jan 13, 2022)

The Accused of Lewes has a ring for a temporary title whilst the jury's out..


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 13, 2022)

friedaweed said:


> The Accused of Lewes has a ring for a temporary title whilst the jury's out..


And after, Broke of Stoke.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 13, 2022)

Sprocket. said:


> Eric Bloodaxe would be seething!


The hunt is on for his descendants to fight Andrew for the city.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 13, 2022)

friedaweed said:


> The Accused of Lewes has a ring for a temporary title whilst the jury's out..


Yesterday's penguin elevenses and today's guano sounds better


----------



## Sprocket. (Jan 13, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> The hunt is on for his descendants to fight Andrew for the city.


On my way!


----------



## friedaweed (Jan 13, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> And after, Broke of Stoke.


Stoke is bad enough without any association with the Crim from Lymm


----------



## eatmorecheese (Jan 13, 2022)

Ah, shame. I had him down for Vice-Consul in Pitcairn, resident on Henderson Island (uninhabited). I guess he'll just rot on one of his mum's estates now.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 13, 2022)

eatmorecheese said:


> Ah, shame. I had him down for Vice-Consul in Pitcairn, resident on Henderson Island (uninhabited). I guess he'll just rot on one of his mum's estates now.


The penguins have him down for dinner


----------



## friedaweed (Jan 13, 2022)

Previous Duke of York, Richard of Shrewsbury dissappeared in the Tower of London in 1483. I wonder if Brenda has considered her options yet...


----------



## T & P (Jan 13, 2022)

Duke of Kidderfiddlerminster


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 13, 2022)

Idris2002 said:


> Next week: overnight stay with a bottle of whiskey and loaded revolver?


He'd probably have it pointing the wrong way round


----------



## davesgcr (Jan 13, 2022)

existentialist said:


> To someone as entitled as him, that might as well be prison.
> 
> That's one of the downsides of living at the lofty heights...you don't have to fall far to be extremely deprived, relatively speaking. Ahahaha, "relatively".



It probably has felt like a "comfortable" prison - after all , his local trips out have probably been just to see Ma at Windsor , apart from a spell hiding in Balmoral from potential writ servers ......but then who can really feel sorry for such a person who would start a day by telling his servants to "fu++k off" when the tea was brought in.  How far does a 20k pension go in the social housing stakes....


----------



## Wilf (Jan 13, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> What kind of total cunt has a “favourite son” anyway?


Yeah, I've often wondered what this all says about her relationship with Charlie.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 13, 2022)

SpookyFrank said:


> So Brenda's officially thrown her favourite son under the bus. Season eight of The Crown is gonna be a belter.


Chris Noth is probably available


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 13, 2022)

Wilf said:


> Yeah, I've often wondered what this all says about her relationship with Charlie.


And the other one!


----------



## Dr. Furface (Jan 13, 2022)

Duke of Woking


----------



## Wilf (Jan 13, 2022)

Sprocket. said:


> He could be the Duke of Rochdale or Rotherham.


No he fucking can't, _I'm _the Duke of Rochdale.


----------



## existentialist (Jan 13, 2022)

Dr. Furface said:


> Duke of Woking


Hasn't Woking suffered enough?


----------



## Sprocket. (Jan 13, 2022)

Wilf said:


> No he fucking can't, _I'm _the Duke of Rochdale.


And I’m that count from Rotherham!
I think that’s what they call me.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 13, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> And the other one!


I always forget the other one.


----------



## UrbaneFox (Jan 13, 2022)

Idris2002 said:


> Next week: overnight stay with a bottle of whiskey and loaded revolver?


It was just an ordinary shooting weekend.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 13, 2022)

Anyway, he's still 9th in line:








						Succession to the British throne - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				




Even if his name is shrinking. Maybe he's doing a Tony Benn and when he lops a few more bits off he'll end up as a rather confused soggy version of a Marxist?


----------



## A380 (Jan 13, 2022)

Raheem said:


> Hard to imagine how they will cope without a duke to guide them, TBF.



The Lancastrian army will be over the Pennines by mid March you mark my words.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 13, 2022)

spitfire is right, he needs exiled to France, Duke of Annecy.


And you lot need to learn how to pronounce Annecy…


----------



## TopCat (Jan 13, 2022)

Sprocket. said:


> I wonder if, with hindsight he wishes an Exocet had taken him out.





Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Does he still get a free house from his ma? It's not a house, but a 'lodge'. No, not a caravan on the Isle of Wight, not that kind of lodge, this is it...
> 
> View attachment 305784
> 
> ...


Fucks sake. We can't let the nonce stay there, at our expense.


----------



## A380 (Jan 13, 2022)

HRH

The Humboldts are Really Hungry?


----------



## Raheem (Jan 13, 2022)

A380 said:


> The Lancastrian army will be over the Pennines by mid March you mark my words.


Mid-March? It's uphill after you get to Ashton, you know.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 13, 2022)

The tone of the media coverage has got notably colder and judgemental toward him tonight. His Mum disowning him seems to have been more of a trigger than yesterdays judgement.


----------



## T & P (Jan 13, 2022)

I’m not a military man and don’t know how titles are awarded, but putting aside the issue of merit/ actions performed whilst serving, I would imagine a main requisite would be to have actually served in the regiment in question? According to the Guardian, he held titles for eight different regiments. Has he served in all of them? 




			
				 Grauniad said:
			
		

> But he still retained the roles, leaving eight British regiments, including the Grenadier Guards, where he had held the title of colonel, in limbo for more than two years.
> 
> His other British honorary military titles were: honorary air commodore of RAF Lossiemouth; colonel-in-chief of the Royal Irish Regiment; colonel-in-chief of the Small Arms School Corps; commodore-in-chief of the Fleet Air Arm; royal colonel of the Royal Highland Fusiliers; deputy colonel-in-chief of the Royal Lancers (Queen Elizabeths’ Own) and royal colonel of the Royal Regiment of Scotland.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 13, 2022)

Sprocket. said:


> And I’m that count from Rotherham!
> I think that’s what they call me.


Rotherham? For some reason I had it in my head that you were from the middle of Scunthorpe


----------



## Sprocket. (Jan 13, 2022)

DaveCinzano said:


> Rotherham? For some reason I had it in my head that you were from the middle of Scunthorpe


Both steel towns. I currently live mid way between Rotherham and Scunthorpe.


----------



## elbows (Jan 13, 2022)

T & P said:


> I’m not a military man and don’t know how titles are awarded, but putting aside the issue of merit/ actions performed whilst serving, I would imagine a main requisite would be to have actually served in the regiment in question? According to the Guardian, he held titles for eight different regiments. Has he served in all of them?


The 'honorary' aspect means they can dish them out without actual merit or any formal requirements.


----------



## existentialist (Jan 13, 2022)

T & P said:


> I’m not a military man and don’t know how titles are awarded, but putting aside the issue of merit/ actions performed whilst serving, I would imagine a main requisite would be to have actually served in the regiment in question? According to the Guardian, he held titles for eight different regiments. Has he served in all of them?


I imagine they're almost certainly honorary ranks. As Colonel-in-Chief of these various groups, he won't have any operational input, just ceremonial and honorific connections. So it's no wonder that members of those groups would rather not have to honour an honorary "superior rank" who's pretty much conclusively being confirmed as a sex abuser.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 13, 2022)

Sprocket. said:


> Both steel towns. I currently live mid way between Rotherham and Scunthorpe.


----------



## LDC (Jan 13, 2022)

T & P said:


> I’m not a military man and don’t know how titles are awarded, but putting aside the issue of merit/ actions performed whilst serving, I would imagine a main requisite would be to have actually served in the regiment in question? According to the Guardian, he held titles for eight different regiments. Has he served in all of them?



No, no service needed, they're honorary.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 13, 2022)

His lowliness Andrew Windsor is likely to be strapped for cash, I reckon. If his shit hot lawyers haven't already submitted an interim account, they will now. It's not going to be easy for him to borrow money off mates any more.


----------



## davesgcr (Jan 13, 2022)

TopCat said:


> Fucks sake. We can't let the nonce stay there, at our expense.


"Ma" - sorry HMQ , always avoided family stress and disputes (say various books etc) ,and would often refer things to the late Duke of Edinburgh. 

She must be well displeased to take such action , and so curtly. Even before the traditional leaks to print in the Sunday press. Hope she has an extra martini this evening.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 13, 2022)

‘Chucked under royal bus’: Prince Andrew’s demotion shows institution’s ruthlessness
					

Analysis: Duke of York’s loss of royal patronages and military titles reveals inner workings of family




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## TopCat (Jan 13, 2022)

Key outstanding questions include whether Andrew will retain financial support from the royal family and his home in the grounds of Windsor castle


----------



## TopCat (Jan 13, 2022)

They keep changing his picture on the BBC website to one looking increasingly shitting himself. Three so far tonight.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 13, 2022)

TopCat said:


> They keep changing his picture on the BBC website to one looking increasingly shitting himself. Three so far tonight.


The Duke of Bristol


----------



## LDC (Jan 13, 2022)

TopCat said:


> They keep changing his picture on the BBC website to one looking increasingly shitting himself. Three so far tonight.



Another week and hopefully it'll look like one of those before and after ten years of meth addiction pics.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 13, 2022)

Writing his obituary now. 








						The fall of Prince Andrew – a timeline
					

How concerns were raised over his relationship with the convicted child sex offender Jeffrey Epstein




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## izz (Jan 13, 2022)

pseudonarcissus said:


> Everyone I ever spoke to who was in the Falklands with him utterly detested him.


Why specifically, do you know ? General twattishness or something specific ? 

I reckon he's being thrown under the bus for this to save worse things coming out.


----------



## 1927 (Jan 13, 2022)

steveseagull said:


> Now he has had his HRH removed are NonceRover going to remove his motor?


That would actually have more effect o his day to day life I suspect!


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 13, 2022)

izz said:


> I reckon he's being thrown under the bus for this to save worse things coming out.




His least worst option is to now ignore it. State that the case has damaged the monarchy enough and he has no intention of letting it overshadow Her Maj’s jubilee year, and then just fuck off. With the roles and titles gone he can do that. He’ll get a default judgement against him, better than a judged judgement. He’ll get damages awarded against him which probably will be enforceable in the U.K., but he’s been making it known for quite a while he has no money or assets.

I would love him to go to court, either in person or via video link, but surely even a dim-witted, moronic imbecile such as HRH Nonceface would see how badly that will pan out. Surely to fuck!


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 13, 2022)

1927 said:


> That would actually have more effect o his day to day life I suspect!



Not if Pizza Express do delivery.


----------



## MrSki (Jan 13, 2022)

Not read the last few pages yet but I understand that Prince Andrew is to lose all his titles except for nonce?


----------



## steveseagull (Jan 13, 2022)




----------



## equationgirl (Jan 13, 2022)

Athos said:


> Yes, but that's a much wider allegation; there, he's denying having sex with her.  But I think he's been quite careful not to deny ever having met her.


He did initially, in the interview. Eventually, he said 'oh, her'.


----------



## donkyboy (Jan 13, 2022)

If the Duke of York title is removed, does that mean he will no longer have 10,000 men to march to the top of the hill and march them down again?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 13, 2022)

SpookyFrank said:


> Not if Pizza Express do delivery.


He's more likely to use paedo express


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 13, 2022)

donkyboy said:


> If the Duke of York title is removed, does that mean he will no longer have 10,000 men to march to the top of the hill and march them down again?




Would be a shame, as the headline of this flattering article about him from 2008 would need to be changed…The too grand old Duke of Pork


----------



## pseudonarcissus (Jan 13, 2022)

izz said:


> Why specifically, do you know ? General twattishness or something specific ?
> 
> I reckon he's being thrown under the bus for this to save worse things coming out.


General twatishness…telling more senior officers they were to call him Sir in the wardroom..


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 13, 2022)

TopCat said:


> Writing his obituary now.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Dead man walking


----------



## MrSki (Jan 13, 2022)




----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 13, 2022)

what a downer for him. he was due to be promoted to admiral until this happened. 

yes, fucking admiral


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 13, 2022)

not-bono-ever said:


> what a downer for him. he was due to be promoted to admiral until this happened.
> 
> yes, fucking admiral


But now the ad contract's been cancelled


----------



## Dystopiary (Jan 13, 2022)

DaveCinzano said:


> Rotherham? For some reason I had it in my head that you were from the middle of Scunthorpe


Well that's somewhere Andrew'd fit right in, between the "s" and the "h". 

Meanwhile, won't the toe-sucker have her title dropped too? Don't see how she can stay "Duchess". She won't like having to suffer the humiliation of changing her twitter handle.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 13, 2022)

maybe HRH Liz has seen the light and decided to wind down the monarchy to avoid a yekaterinburg style showdown ?


----------



## petee (Jan 13, 2022)

i can't keep up, if he is still duke of york, does that mean he has a tidy income and a nice house despite all?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 13, 2022)

his mum is loaded


----------



## UrbaneFox (Jan 13, 2022)

The revolver, in the ballroom.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 13, 2022)

friedaweed said:


> Is there a town that rhymes with Nonce ?


Bronx?


----------



## Zapp Brannigan (Jan 14, 2022)

Provence?


----------



## Wilf (Jan 14, 2022)

Perhaps they should give the Dukedom to that bloke who paid for johnson's wallpaper?


----------



## Raheem (Jan 14, 2022)

Make it an elected position where you need 10,000 men to sign your paperwork in order to stand.


----------



## existentialist (Jan 14, 2022)

dessiato said:


> Let me make it clear, I think he's guilty, on the balance of probabilities, and I readily condemn anyone who abuses others
> 
> It seems a little sad that someone who could, if he'd been a decent and honourable man, have done so much good for the forces on the back of his experience.


The forces were not that enamoured of him while he was acquiring that experience, TBF.


----------



## existentialist (Jan 14, 2022)

izz said:


> Why specifically, do you know ? General twattishness or something specific ?
> 
> I reckon he's being thrown under the bus for this to save worse things coming out.


I'd heard he wasn't well thought of. Fancied himself beyond his abilities.


----------



## steveseagull (Jan 14, 2022)

She is going for his throat, not his $$$


----------



## steveseagull (Jan 14, 2022)




----------



## David Clapson (Jan 14, 2022)

He's being allowed to keep his naval rank of Vice-Admiral,  to keep him in line with his peers in the Navy. But he wouldn't have got past Lieutenant if he'd been a civilian. That's if he'd not been rejected at the interview. 

I wonder how many of the royal helicopter pilots would have got the job if they'd been civilians? Charles, Andrew, Harry and William apparently all good enough to get one of the most competitive jobs in the world.


----------



## High Voltage (Jan 14, 2022)

Wasn't /isn't one of them an Apache pilot. IF truly gained on merit, that's impressive I believe, but if strings were pulled...


----------



## Sprocket. (Jan 14, 2022)

petee said:


> i can't keep up, if he is still duke of york, does that mean he has a tidy income and a nice house despite all?


The Duke title can be removed by an act of parliament. The last time any Dukedoms were removed was during WW1, when two Royal Dukes sided with the Royal family’s cousin Wilhelm II the German Kaiser.
The HRH title used to be used by all members of the family, but recently came to identify one of those who served an official capacity and therefore received money from the civil list for the duties they provided.
Harry walked away from this and gave up his HRH privileges.


----------



## petee (Jan 14, 2022)

Sprocket. said:


> The Duke title can be removed by an act of parliament. The last time any Dukedoms were removed was during WW1, when two Royal Dukes sided with the Royal family’s cousin Wilhelm II the German Kaiser.
> The HRH title used to be used by all members of the family, but recently came to identify one of those who served an official capacity and therefore received money from the civil list for the duties they provided.
> Harry walked away from this and gave up his HRH privileges.



i see. so having been stripped of the HRH, he receives no money from this civil list (see below). but is there some feudal possession that goes with Duke of York - lands, a castle - the would provide an income?

wiki tells me the civil list was abolished recently but something wss put in its place.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jan 14, 2022)




----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 14, 2022)

petee said:


> i see. so having been stripped of the HRH, he receives no money from this civil list (see below). but is there some feudal possession that goes with Duke of York - lands, a castle - the would provide an income?
> 
> wiki tells me the civil list was abolished recently but something wss put in its place.




No, he just sponges off his mum, like any honourable 61 year old does.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 14, 2022)

So no longer HRH Prince Andrew. Will the court in NY be able to call him Mr Windsor? That’ll sting.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 14, 2022)

Brainaddict said:


> "The establishment are conspiring to keep [shit thing] out of the news by running stories on [other shit thing] is my least favourite leftist social media take. It attributes way too much coordination to the different sections of the establishment, and in most circumstances assumes too much ability to control when things get released. It's leftie conspiracy theory basically.


Take your point, but in the case of the “spy” story that was simply a matter of Patel deciding to go public and, as we know, the tories have long loved the dead cat strategy. I accept that the timing of Andrew’s defenestration might well be coincidental but, then again, I imagine such things would be discussed between Buckingham House & No. 10?

Either way, it didn’t really work and parties are back!


----------



## brogdale (Jan 14, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> So no longer HRH Prince Andrew. Will the court in NY be able to call him Mr Windsor? That’ll sting.


Isn’t that (possibly unhelpfully ?) properly Mr Mountbatten-Windsor?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 14, 2022)

Does this seemingly symbolic but pointless exercise in de royaling this nonce have any impact on his seizable asset base ?


----------



## maomao (Jan 14, 2022)

brogdale said:


> Take your point, but in the case of the “spy” story that was simply a matter of Patel deciding to go public and, as we know, the tories have long loved the dead cat strategy. I accept that the timing of Andrew’s defenestration might well be coincidental but, then again, I imagine such things would be discussed between Buckingham House & No. 10?
> 
> Either way, it didn’t really work and parties are back!


The Chinese spy story was definitely a plant, almost comically so, but I seriously doubt Buck Pal would lift a finger to help and certainly not with something this damaging to them.


----------



## Sprocket. (Jan 14, 2022)

petee said:


> i see. so having been stripped of the HRH, he receives no money from this civil list (see below). but is there some feudal possession that goes with Duke of York - lands, a castle - the would provide an income?
> 
> wiki tells me the civil list was abolished recently but something wss put in its place.


Yes not the civil list I couldn’t remember what it had become. I replied to your post whilst letting the dogs out in the middle of the night.
The title Duke of York is usually given to the reining monarch’s second son.


----------



## quiet guy (Jan 14, 2022)

The Sovereign Grant replaced The Civil List. Same thing different name, just means that more departments in Whitehall now foot different elements of monies that Liz receives.


----------



## surreybrowncap (Jan 14, 2022)

High Voltage said:


> Wasn't /isn't one of them an Apache pilot. IF truly gained on merit, that's impressive I believe, but if strings were pulled...


That was Prince Harry I believe.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 14, 2022)

petee said:


> i see. so having been stripped of the HRH, he receives no money from this civil list (see below). but is there some feudal possession that goes with Duke of York - lands, a castle - the would provide an income?


a sob story


----------



## rubbershoes (Jan 14, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> So no longer HRH Prince Andrew. Will the court in NY be able to call him Mr Windsor? That’ll sting.



Afaik still Prince Andrew, just not HRH any more


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 14, 2022)

rubbershoes said:


> Afaik still Prince Andrew, just not HRH any more



Heh, seems he will still be known as HRH in private so that he doesn't need to bow to Baldy's kids, or indeed his own kids. 

What a fucking bunch of dicks.


----------



## rubbershoes (Jan 14, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> What a fucking bunch of dicks.



I concur with the honourable member's assessment


----------



## JoeyBoy (Jan 14, 2022)

rubbershoes said:


> Afaik still Prince Andrew, just not HRH any more


This is like the royal equivalent of your mum telling you you've been a bad boy. No-one calls me HRH and  I don't think I'm losing out on that. Been called the Accused a couple of times and that has felt a lot more threatening.
What happens if he doesn't bow to William and his brats, will they stick him in the Tower of London or just tut-tut at him.


----------



## Dom Traynor (Jan 14, 2022)

surreybrowncap said:


> That was Prince Harry I believe.


Correct, again and again showing himself to be the most capable and quick on the uptake of the firm.


----------



## gosub (Jan 14, 2022)

Dom Traynor said:


> Correct, again and again showing himself to be the most capable and quick on the uptake of the firm.


in learning how to move his eyeballs independantly


----------



## rubbershoes (Jan 14, 2022)

gosub said:


> in learning how to move his eyeballs independantly



He choose to get away from the rest of the family and deserves some credit for that


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 14, 2022)

As regards new titles for his Lowness Andrew of Civvy St, I've more or less settled on Duck of Yuck. Fitting, picturesque .. plus it sounds almost exactly like f-

_cut to credits_


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 14, 2022)

It’s curious that Harry got a B in art and a D in geography at A level yet RAF helicopter pilots are expected to have two A levels with maths and science being desirable.


----------



## gosub (Jan 14, 2022)

rubbershoes said:


> He choose to get away from the rest of the family and deserves some credit for that


Soon as his brother had his first sprog didn't really have a royal function, though didn't hang about like a bad smell like Andrew.  Was more a comment on flight training for Apache pilots has long lasting impact on their pilots eyes in a way they are hoping helmet displays in newer kit like the F35 wont


----------



## killer b (Jan 14, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> It’s curious that Harry got a B in art and a D in geography at A level yet RAF helicopters are expected to have two A levels with maths and science being desirable.


surely he deserved even _more_ credit for overcoming his academic failures so comprehensively.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 14, 2022)

killer b said:


> surely he deserved even _more_ credit for overcoming his academic failures so comprehensively.


It’s incredible what any of them have achieved, really, given all they’ve had to overcome.


----------



## Santino (Jan 14, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> It’s incredible what any of them have achieved, really, given all they’ve had to overcome.


Living in state-owned accommodation near Slough, living off handouts from the government.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 14, 2022)

Santino said:


> Living in state-owned accommodation near Slough, living off handouts from the government.



Hand me downs, even most of their names are hand me downs


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 14, 2022)

I mean look at all the medals Andrew has. I think two of them are for his mum living through 1977 and then 2002.  It look enormous courage in his part. I’m in awe really.


----------



## JimW (Jan 14, 2022)

Think they let him keep vice admiral as it seemed appropriate?


----------



## LDC (Jan 14, 2022)

JimW said:


> Think they let him keep vice admiral as it seemed appropriate?



And Chief Scoutmaster for the same reason.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 14, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Hand me downs, even most of their names are hand me downs


rumour has it that no future member of the royal family will ever be named andrew again because of its unsavoury associations


----------



## izz (Jan 14, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> It’s curious that Harry got a B in art and a D in geography at A level yet RAF helicopter pilots are expected to have two A levels with maths and science being desirable.


I'm by no means a royal-follower but I believe meeting the entry requirements for the Forces would be unusual in our monarchy.


----------



## 1927 (Jan 14, 2022)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> And Chief Scoutmaster for the same reason.


He’s never held the role!


----------



## MickiQ (Jan 14, 2022)

He actually left the RN with the rank of Commander, I think they have some weird system where you can get promoted a rank after you leave (I will have to risk massive boredom and ask my FiL when I next see him) so maybe he is entitled to be a Captain but surely the Vice-Admiral thing must be honorary.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 14, 2022)

It's a shit rag, but they do some cracking front pages.


----------



## Dom Traynor (Jan 14, 2022)

cupid_stunt said:


> It's a shit rag, but they do some cracking front pages.
> 
> View attachment 305871


That really is Daily Star bingo just amazing Gina Miller isn't there


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 14, 2022)

cupid_stunt said:


> It's a shit rag, but they do some cracking front pages.
> 
> View attachment 305871




How to spot if there's a party going on in your garden


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 14, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> How to spot if there's a party going on in your garden



Yeah, I cropped that for use on the monster twat thread.


----------



## krtek a houby (Jan 14, 2022)

Bit concerned over the anti shark bait


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jan 14, 2022)

Sadness in that lil’ dogs eyes


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 14, 2022)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> And Chief Scoutmaster for the same reason.



Thought that was Bear Grylls.


----------



## chandlerp (Jan 14, 2022)

Now everywhere he's associated with are trying to distance themselves I wonder if Fiddler's Ferry have thought of making him an offer.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 14, 2022)

chandlerp said:


> Now everywhere he's associated with are trying to distance themselves I wonder if Fiddler's Ferry have thought of making him an offer.


What’s that?


----------



## chandlerp (Jan 14, 2022)

It's a power station in Widnes


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 14, 2022)

A redundant power station.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 14, 2022)

SpookyFrank said:


> Thought that was Bear Grylls.



There's probably some piss drinking venn diagram crossover there.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 14, 2022)

SpookyFrank said:


> Thought that was Bear Grylls.


“Bear”. What a cunt.


----------



## belboid (Jan 14, 2022)

Bear grylls but Andrew fries


----------



## LDC (Jan 14, 2022)

SpookyFrank said:


> Thought that was Bear Grylls.



It was a scoutsmasters = nonces joke.


----------



## friedaweed (Jan 14, 2022)

belboid said:


> Bear grylls but Andrew fries


Think it'll end up being more of a rolling boil


----------



## UrbaneFox (Jan 14, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> It’s incredible what any of them have achieved, really, given all they’ve had to overcome.


Prince William graciously acknowledged his optician's near insistence that he wear spectacles, and went on to qualify as a helicopter pilot.

If the other would-be applicants showed that same strength of character, instead of blindly - no eye joke intended! - accepting the rule that short-sighted persons were not allowed to train as pilots, this country might be in a damned better state than it is today.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 14, 2022)

David Clapson said:


> He's being allowed to keep his naval rank of Vice-Admiral,  to keep him in line with his peers in the Navy. But he wouldn't have got past Lieutenant if he'd been a civilian. That's if he'd not been rejected at the interview.
> 
> I wonder how many of the royal helicopter pilots would have got the job if they'd been civilians? Charles, Andrew, Harry and William apparently all good enough to get one of the most competitive jobs in the world.


If they keep stripping away all the perks, gifts and houses he gets, he'll end up kipping in his car.  Oh, hang on...


----------



## 1927 (Jan 14, 2022)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> It was a scoutsmasters = nonces joke.


But not funny if there’s no basis in fact!


----------



## TopCat (Jan 14, 2022)

Sarah Ferguson: will ex-wife continue to ‘remain steadfast’ for Prince Andrew’?
					

Duchess of York appears to be one of few people Andrew can still turn to for unconditional support




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 14, 2022)

TopCat said:


> Sarah Ferguson: will ex-wife continue to ‘remain steadfast’ for Prince Andrew’?
> 
> 
> Duchess of York appears to be one of few people Andrew can still turn to for unconditional support
> ...



Right up until he gets slung out of the mansion and she pockles the cash from the sale the Verbier gaff...


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 14, 2022)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> It was a scoutsmasters = nonces joke.



Ok well fuck off with that then. Try living in a society where nobody does voluntary youth work. Better still try actually doing voluntary youth work and getting called a nonce as a reward.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 14, 2022)

SpookyFrank said:


> Ok well fuck off with that then. Try living in a society where nobody does voluntary youth work. Better still try actually doing voluntary youth work and getting called a nonce as a reward.


Certainly the huge scale of rape and abuse in the scouts towards children was subject to continued cover ups for decades. There remains a stink to the organisation.


----------



## dessiato (Jan 14, 2022)

SpookyFrank said:


> Ok well fuck off with that then. Try living in a society where nobody does voluntary youth work. Better still try actually doing voluntary youth work and getting called a nonce as a reward.


This is why I won't get involved in this area.



TopCat said:


> Certainly the huge scale of rape and abuse in the scouts towards children was subject to continued cover ups for decades. There remains a stink to the organisation.


Yes there was a lot, yes there was a lot of cover up, but by far the largest number of leaders were decent people trying to do something to help. It's unfair, and inaccurate to suggest otherwise


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 14, 2022)

dessiato said:


> This is why I won't get involved in this area.
> 
> 
> Yes there was a lot, yes there was a lot of cover up, but by far the largest number of leaders were decent people trying to do something to help. It's unfair, and inaccurate to suggest otherwise



And the scouts serve a purpose, unlike say catholicism.


----------



## dessiato (Jan 14, 2022)

SpookyFrank said:


> And the scouts serve a purpose, unlike say catholicism.


Which if it was really Christian it would have.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 14, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Right up until he gets slung out of the mansion and she pockles the cash from the sale the Verbier gaff...


Yeah. Why would she condemn her source of free rent in a stately home? She's fond of the finer things in life.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 14, 2022)

SpookyFrank said:


> And the scouts serve a purpose, unlike say catholicism.


I was in the cubs and along with learning to tie knots and clearing up people's shit for charity they also instilled a strong sense of Nationalism. You had to swear allegiance to the Queen for entry. 
So yeah. I guess they do serve a purpose.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 14, 2022)

SpookyFrank said:


> And the scouts serve a purpose, unlike say catholicism.


Catholicism serves a purpose


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 14, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> I was in the cubs and along with learning to tie knots and clearing up people's shit for charity they also instilled a strong sense of Nationalism. You had to swear allegiance to the Queen for entry.
> So yeah. I guess they do serve a purpose.


Yeh I learned the national anthem in the cubs, the sort of shit that stays with you forever


----------



## brogdale (Jan 14, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> Catholicism serves a purpose


Exactly; Diderot knew.._.Men will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest._


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 14, 2022)

SpookyFrank said:


> And the scouts serve a purpose, unlike say catholicism.



To prepare children for war?


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 14, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh I learned the national anthem in the cubs, the sort of shit that stays with you forever


Don't forget 'the promise'

_On my honour, I promise that I will do my best
to uphold our Scout values, to do my duty to The Queen,
to help other people
and to keep the Scout Law._


----------



## two sheds (Jan 14, 2022)

dib dib dib


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 14, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> Catholicism serves a purpose



Knowing what the levels of pedantry are like round here, I probably should have specified a purpose that's not morally abhorrent.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 14, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Don't forget 'the promise'
> 
> _On my honour, I promise that I will do my best
> to uphold our Scout values, to do my duty to The Queen,
> ...



I can see why many people would take issue with that, I certainly would, but those issues fall some way short of the whole organisation being a cesspool of child abuse. For a lot of kids it'll be a couple of precious evenings a week away from abusive or neglectful families.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 14, 2022)

Teaboy said:


> To prepare children for war?




BB2 is in the Cubs, this is her at Cub Camp, I think you may have a point...


----------



## friedaweed (Jan 14, 2022)

SpookyFrank said:


> Try living in a society where nobody does voluntary youth work. Better still try actually doing voluntary youth work and getting called a nonce as a reward.




Bang on there Frank.

I'm sure this been done to death on a number of threads over the years actually but once again I will hold my hand up and announce that I am proud to say that I was a scout. No-one bum-fingered me, I learned how to kayak, sail, whittle, Map-read, tie a woggle and I did bob a job for old people on our estate. That in turn lead me to join the youth club where I went rock climbing, learned how to develop film and ended up pursuing a career with those skills which got me to where I am today. School on the other hand left no lasting impact on my direction in life.

My lad was also a cub and the people who volunteered to run his pack were wonderful people who just wanted to see kids have a good laugh and provided some real positive role models in his life. Then he got to meet Bear Grills and Steve Backshall. He's much more independent as a result of going away on camp and fecking off on every trip that they had going and they took him to do all sorts of stuff you wouldn't traditionally associate with scouting.

It's a shame that these folk are still having to shake off the stink that other folk left. 

Having an altruistic tendency to want to better the lives of society's youth is a perfectly normal human trait which sadly some people are put off participating in because of flippant noncery suggestions from some of their peers.

Bit sad really.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 14, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> BB2 is in the Cubs, this is her at Cub Camp, I think you may have a point...
> 
> View attachment 305919



Yeah, I mean lets not pretend its otherwise.  It was Baden-Powell's original mission to prepare boys to be in the army.  I was in the cubs and scouts and got a lot out of it but it is what it is.


----------



## friedaweed (Jan 14, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> BB2 is in the Cubs, this is her at Cub Camp, I think you may have a point...
> 
> View attachment 305919


We've got 3 rifles at home as a result of Finn-larden's cub celebrated marksmanship.

ETA... and as a result he's never acted like a dick with them.  In fact he's the one who scolds me for leaving the safety off.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 14, 2022)

Teaboy said:


> Yeah, I mean lets not pretend its otherwise.  It was Baden-Powell's original mission to prepare boys to be in the army.  I was in the cubs and scouts and got a lot out of it but it is what it is.




I fell out with the Akela after around 8 weeks. Well I fell out with her on the first evening tbf, but after 8 weeks I binned it off. Miserable fucker that she was.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 14, 2022)

I left the cubs because they wouldn't give me my skipping badge  

I know I've complained about this before but it left a mark


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 14, 2022)

two sheds said:


> I left the cubs because they wouldn't give me my skipping badge
> 
> I know I've complained about this before but it left a mark



Yes we know, everyone knows.  You use it as mitigation every single time you're up before the beak.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 14, 2022)

Teaboy said:


> Yeah, I mean lets not pretend its otherwise.  It was Baden-Powell's original mission to prepare boys to be in the army.  I was in the cubs and scouts and got a lot out of it but it is what it is.



Baden-Powell has been dead for some time, you realise.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 14, 2022)

friedaweed said:


> Bang on there Frank.
> 
> I'm sure this been done to death on a number of threads over the years actually but once again I will hold my hand up and announce that I am proud to say that I was a scout. No-one bum-fingered me, I learned how to kayak, sail, whittle, Map-read, tie a woggle and I did bob a job for old people on our estate. That in turn lead me to join the youth club where I went rock climbing, learned how to develop film and ended up pursuing a career with those skills which got me to where I am today. School on the other hand left no lasting impact on my direction in life.
> 
> ...


I was a scout too and got all that. But many many scouts were raped and it was shown that peado's flocked towards the scouts and were allowed to get away with it since the beginning.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 14, 2022)

Prince Andrew faces calls to pay for his own security
					

Growing clamour for royal to lose dukedom and taxpayer-funded Scotland Yard security detail




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## two sheds (Jan 14, 2022)

I'm surprised Brenda didn't tell him that he should give up all the things she took off him before she took them off him. Or perhaps she did and he refused. 

He'd have been a lot better off a while ago saying "I'm retiring from public life and responsibilities until the court case is over". But I suppose he'd then lose things like taxpayer-funded security details.


----------



## dessiato (Jan 14, 2022)

TopCat said:


> I was a scout too and got all that. But many many scouts were raped and it was shown that peado's flocked towards the scouts and were allowed to get away with it since the beginning.


My mother was a guide captain and used to take me along. It was great fun. I was about 5/6, possibly 7, and the girls used to fuss over me and spoil me. I loved being a Girl Guide (honorary)


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jan 14, 2022)

friedaweed said:


> Bang on there Frank.
> 
> I'm sure this been done to death on a number of threads over the years actually but once again I will hold my hand up and announce that I am proud to say that I was a scout. No-one bum-fingered me, I learned how to kayak, sail, whittle, Map-read, tie a woggle and I did bob a job for old people on our estate. That in turn lead me to join the youth club where I went rock climbing, learned how to develop film and ended up pursuing a career with those skills which got me to where I am today. School on the other hand left no lasting impact on my direction in life.
> 
> ...


All of this. I was a Cub, Scout, Venture Scout and then a group leader* for a few years.

Scouting was, and is, brilliant for kids.


*whilst being an atheist republican… I taught the kids that “god” represented whatever your personal moral code happened to be, and that your duty to “the queen” represented your local community and that of the wider world around you.


----------



## petee (Jan 14, 2022)

i had a blast in the scouts, and no adult ever so much as looked wrongly at us. the patriotic stuff was always observed but was pro-forma and there was no militarism. see, i came out of it a libcommie.

i'm happy that others had something like the same experience.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 14, 2022)

two sheds said:


> I'm surprised Brenda didn't tell him that he should give up all the things she took off him before she took them off him. Or perhaps she did and he refused.
> 
> He'd have been a lot better off a while ago saying "I'm retiring from public life and responsibilities until the court case is over". But I suppose he'd then lose things like taxpayer-funded security details.


He'd have been a lot better off if he wasn't an international nonce


----------



## two sheds (Jan 14, 2022)

That's a very good point.


----------



## 1927 (Jan 14, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Don't forget 'the promise'
> 
> _On my honour, I promise that I will do my best
> to uphold our Scout values, to do my duty to The Queen,
> ...


In my day it was,

I  promise that I will do my best,
To do my duty to GOD and to the Queen...


----------



## friedaweed (Jan 14, 2022)

I've told this tale before but both my kids pledged to do their duty to 'Bod' and to 'Queen' (the band) that's basically what Brown Owl and Arkela told the kids to say if they, unlike them, didn't believe in the beardy white fellow in the clouds.


----------



## Kevbad the Bad (Jan 14, 2022)

I wanted desperately to join the Cubs, cos my best friend was in it. My local Cubs insisted on regular attendance at church. When I discovered that my mind was made up. No Cubs. A decision I have never regretted.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 14, 2022)

Kevbad the Bad said:


> I wanted desperately to join the Cubs, cos my best friend was in it. My local Cubs insisted on regular attendance at church. When I discovered that my mind was made up. No Cubs. A decision I have never regretted.


Don't think I ever went to church while in the cubs


----------



## Kevbad the Bad (Jan 14, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> Don't think I ever went to church while in the cubs


Afterwards?


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Jan 14, 2022)

If his mum had been anyone else, I'd have pitied her, she might not have thought the allegations were believable.  As it is, she's known forever, cos secret service, what her boy has been up to and supported him nonetheless, right up to the point where he has to admit guilt and settle or go to court. If just one thing has changed as a result of this story, it has to be the perceived integrity of the dear old queen.


----------



## Serge Forward (Jan 14, 2022)




----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 14, 2022)

Where Andrew is now, I'm struggling to think of anyone who has been such a national pariah/laughing stock in my lifetime.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 14, 2022)

I got chucked out of the Cubs for professing my atheism and for telling Akela that I was never going to salute a stupid flag again - i must have had an early republican epiphany or summat. Soon joined up with Woodcraft Folk instead.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 14, 2022)

AnnaKarpik said:


> If his mum had been anyone else, I'd have pitied her, she might not have thought the allegations were believable.  As it is, she's known forever, cos secret service, what her boy has been up to and supported him nonetheless, right up to the point where he has to admit guilt and settle or go to court. If just one thing has changed as a result of this story, it has to be the perceived integrity of the dear old queen.



I'm glad she's still here to see it. Maybe she'll have a chance to reflect on whether she should've inculcated her offspring with a tiny shred of decency. Sixty years of stoic resolve and loyal service and she gets to leave behind a family and an institution in ruins.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 14, 2022)

SpookyFrank said:


> Where Andrew is now, I'm struggling to think of anyone who has been such a national pariah/laughing stock in my lifetime.


Please, start a thread all of it's own. It could be fab and would roll on.


----------



## weltweit (Jan 14, 2022)

SpookyFrank said:


> Where Andrew is now, I'm struggling to think of anyone who has been such a national pariah/laughing stock in my lifetime.


Johnson, at the same time, loads to ridicule wherever you look ..


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Jan 14, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> A redundant power station.


chandlerp Weirdly, I visited Fiddler's Ferry power station on a 'school trip' when I was studying engineering at uni.

They had a big fish tank in the control room and told us that when they had school trips from school kids, they used to tell the kids that the fish in the tank performed a similar function to canaries in coal mines, ie they could tell if electricity was leaking. 🤣


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Jan 14, 2022)

TopCat said:


> Sarah Ferguson: will ex-wife continue to ‘remain steadfast’ for Prince Andrew’?
> 
> 
> Duchess of York appears to be one of few people Andrew can still turn to for unconditional support
> ...


I'm wondering if they'll re-marry so she can't be called to testify against him.


----------



## friedaweed (Jan 14, 2022)

AnnO'Neemus said:


> chandlerp Weirdly, I visited Fiddler's Ferry power station on a 'school trip' when I was studying engineering at uni.
> 
> They had a big fish tank in the control room and told us that when they had school trips from school kids, they used to tell the kids that the fish in the tank performed a similar function to canaries in coal mines, ie they could tell if electricity was leaking. 🤣


Did you double bubble your visit and explore Widnes's other main attraction, The Catalyst Museum ?


----------



## Glitter (Jan 14, 2022)

AnnO'Neemus said:


> chandlerp Weirdly, I visited Fiddler's Ferry power station on a 'school trip' when I was studying engineering at uni.
> 
> They had a big fish tank in the control room and told us that when they had school trips from school kids, they used to tell the kids that the fish in the tank performed a similar function to canaries in coal mines, ie they could tell if electricity was leaking. 🤣



My Uncle Terry worked at Fiddlers Ferry for years.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 14, 2022)

AnnO'Neemus said:


> I'm wondering if they'll re-marry so she can't be called to testify against him.



The guest list for that one will be on the short side I reckon. Maybe Maxwell could be a witness via video link. 

And maybe she could also attend the wedding.


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Jan 14, 2022)

friedaweed said:


> Did you do double bubble your visit and explore Widnes's other main attraction, The Catalyst Museum ?


Nope, never heard of it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 14, 2022)

Kevbad the Bad said:


> Afterwards?


No


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 14, 2022)

SpookyFrank said:


> I can see why many people would take issue with that, I certainly would, but those issues fall some way short of the whole organisation being a cesspool of child abuse. For a lot of kids it'll be a couple of precious evenings a week away from abusive or neglectful families.


I think there's lots about the scouts that are good. Especially nowadays where kids just stare at screens for joy. It's a shame that it comes with a particular kind of indoctrination. It didn't work on me but it's there doing it's job.


----------



## Serge Forward (Jan 14, 2022)

My youngest lad went to cubs. They were very nice and they didn't bother with all that flag, god and the queen shite. He went to woodies later and liked that as well.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 14, 2022)

Serge Forward said:


> My youngest lad went to cubs. They were very nice and they didn't bother with all that flag, god and the queen shite. He went to woodies later and liked that as well.


There's probably a millennial version now. Back in the day though...
Also my Akela ended up in prison for raping his daughter. So the nonce thing rings true, if only locally.


----------



## 1927 (Jan 14, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> There's probably a millennial version now. Back in the day though...
> Also my Akela ended up in prison for raping his daughter. So the nonce thing rings true, if only locally.


On the basis of one guilty person you are aware of!!!


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 14, 2022)

1927 said:


> On the basis of one guilty person you are aware of!!!


Oh and Baden Powell.


----------



## 1927 (Jan 14, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Oh and Baden Powell.


Really? Even if true its still only 2 cases, bit harsh to smear an entire organisation on that basis.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 14, 2022)

1927 said:


> Really? Even if true its still only 2 cases, bit harsh to smear an entire organisation on that basis.


Oh go on then Mister Apologist.









						More than 250 convicted of child sexual abuse in UK and Ireland while in Scout movement
					

Exclusive: Analysis raises questions about the organisation’s safeguarding procedures




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 14, 2022)

1927 said:


> Really? Even if true its still only 2 cases, bit harsh to smear an entire organisation on that basis.


255 convictions since the 1950s. 

More than 250 convicted of child sexual abuse in UK and Ireland while in Scout movement

As an organisation, it failed miserably to safeguard children against paedophiles, much like the Catholic Church, really. 

It's horrible that good people get smeared because of this, but paedophiles actively seek out positions of responsibility with children, whether it is in the scouts, care homes, sports clubs or church groups. And for a long time, many organisations did little to stop it. It doesn't help anyone to try to downplay that.


----------



## 1927 (Jan 14, 2022)

littlebabyjesus said:


> 255 convictions since the 1950s.
> 
> More than 250 convicted of child sexual abuse in UK and Ireland while in Scout movement
> 
> ...


Thats not the point i was making.


----------



## Cerv (Jan 14, 2022)

After the Prince Andrew scandal, it's time to slim down the monarchy | Simon Jenkins
					

Royal offspring are accidents waiting to happen. Far better to cut down the throne to an heir and a spare, says Guardian columnist Simon Jenkins




					www.theguardian.com
				




I find this Guardian article odd. 
"The throne needs only an heir and a spare. The rest of the family should become commoners and lead normal lives. Perhaps inadvertently, that process started this week."

But Charles is the heir and Andrew colloquially "the spare", as the eldest and second eldest male children of the current monarch. Slimming down the institution like Jenkins says wouldn't have avoided this mess. He'd still have been out there trading on the royal name, not living as a commoner.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Jan 14, 2022)

Cerv said:


> But Charles is the heir and Andrew colloquially "the spare", as the eldest and second eldest male children of the current monarch



not since william came along, he isn't next in line (although, while william was still a child, he - or anne or edward - could have been needed as prince regent if something nasty had happened to both her madge and big ears)


----------



## TopCat (Jan 14, 2022)

Virginia Giuffre seeks testimony from Prince Andrew’s former assistant
					

Attorneys say they have ‘reason to believe’ that Robert Olney has ‘relevant information’ about duke’s relationship with Epstein




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Humberto (Jan 14, 2022)

I mean he is just going to be the beast in perpetual hiding. Utterly embarrasing that this is the head of states' her majesticalness's offspring. At our expense, and, if you give a fuck, makes the country look a bit shit. Which rather takes the shine off the bootlicking and scraping.


----------



## Cerv (Jan 14, 2022)

Puddy_Tat said:


> not since william came along, he isn't next in line (although, while william was still a child, he - or anne or edward - could have been needed as prince regent if something nasty had happened to both her madge and big ears)


well fuck this is more complicated than I paid attention to


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Jan 15, 2022)

Cerv said:


> well fuck this is more complicated than I paid attention to





andrew is 9th in line now.  this has the list of succession down to number 63 whoever the hell they are.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 15, 2022)

Puddy_Tat said:


> andrew is 9th in line now.  this has the list of succession down to number 63 whoever the hell they are.


Zenouska Mowatt.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 15, 2022)

Puddy_Tat said:


> andrew is 9th in line now.  this has the list of succession down to number 63 whoever the hell they are.


he's probably even now encouraging all the previous 8 plus brenda to take a risky airplane/helicopter journey together


----------



## chandlerp (Jan 15, 2022)

Even when he was second in line it was because of the ridiculous idea that females were less important.


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Jan 15, 2022)

Being "the spare" is an odd position.  You start out being well and truly in the spotlight and being treated as important and relevant,  and over the years you fade further and further into the background- still at the public expense.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 15, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Oh go on then Mister Apologist.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


the question to ask is what is that as a percentage of scouting staff and how does it differ from the general population? how is it different from schools for example?

i can think of three teachers i encountered who tried it on with children - one even eloped with a 16 year old


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 15, 2022)

ElizabethofYork said:


> Being "the spare" is an odd position.



It reminds me of the twin brothers, one stored the other's number under 'spare parts'.


----------



## LDC (Jan 15, 2022)

Shit, looking at the last pages I regret making that stupid joke about scouts now. Sent loads of people spinning off. Sorry!


----------



## Athos (Jan 15, 2022)

So, in terms of overseas witnesses, the plaintiff wants to depose Mr Windsor's former equerrey and a woman who claims to have seen the defendant in tennis with a young girl at around the time in question.  HWCS wants to depose Giuffre's husband and her psychologist.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 15, 2022)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Shit, looking at the last pages I regret making that stupid joke about scouts now. Sent loads of people spinning off. Sorry!


That shows a good spirit


----------



## Spymaster (Jan 15, 2022)

littlebabyjesus said:


> 255 convictions since the 1950s.
> 
> More than 250 convicted of child sexual abuse in UK and Ireland while in Scout movement
> 
> ...


Absolutely, and it’s unsurprising that the scout movement may be over represented with nonces given the age of the kids, the extremely target rich nature of scout troops, and the fact that they’ll be spending extended periods away from home. It’s prime fiddler territory. If I had a kid in scouts or any similar group, I’d be keeping a very keen eye on what’s going on.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 15, 2022)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Shit, looking at the last pages I regret making that stupid joke about scouts now. Sent loads of people spinning off. Sorry!



Just wrote another big long rant which would probably have come across badly, then saw this post and decided against it. 

We all post daft things without thinking about them much, few of us bother to apologise for them. Fair play.


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Jan 15, 2022)

Glitter said:


> My Uncle Terry worked at Fiddlers Ferry for years.


Then there's a possibility I might have met him! Small world.


----------



## Santino (Jan 15, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> Zenouska Mowatt.


Bless you


----------



## seeformiles (Jan 15, 2022)

friedaweed said:


> I've told this tale before but both my kids pledged to do their duty to 'Bod' and to 'Queen' (the band) that's what basically what Brown Owl and Arkela told the kids to say if they, unlike them, didn't believe in the beardy white fellow in the clouds.



I was a cub and a scout and it was great. There was no noncery, they didn’t lay the religion or monarchism on too thickly. I think we had to attend the church our hall was attached to about twice a year as recompense for using it but it was a light touch. I loved the fire lighting, bushcraft and tracking bits plus appearing in the Gang Show was brilliant*. Activities organised were not dependent on income and camping in the summer was the only holiday some boys in our troop ever got. 
The book “Scouting For Boys” has parts that are very much of its time but also much that wasn’t. BP doesn’t come across as a white supremacist (as many of his contemporaries were) and instead lauds the outdoor survival skills of African Bushmen, Native Americans, practitioners of martial arts, etc. while always emphasising that all Scouts around the world are brothers and equals. I quite liked that bit about it. The Boys’ Brigade were much more militaristic and seemed to want to emulate the Crimean War - all those bugles, formation marching and Sam Browne belts.

(* In the Gang Show I sang Jonathan King’s “Una Paloma Blanca” but that was as close to noncery as it got 🤔)


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 15, 2022)

Glitter said:


> My Uncle Terry worked at Fiddlers Ferry for years.



This sounds like the opening line of an Ian Dury song.


----------



## Spymaster (Jan 15, 2022)

seeformiles said:


> The Boys’ Brigade were much more militaristic and seemed to want to emulate the Crimean War - all those bugles, formation marching and Sam Browne belts.



The Boy's Brigade has always given me the creeps for having more than a passing resemblance to the Hitler Youth.


----------



## dessiato (Jan 15, 2022)

Based on the figures given earlier, and assuming from 1955 to 2020 there’s “only” been an average of between three and four convictions a year of scout leaders. Obviously it would be better if the number was zero. Given how many scouts, and leaders there must have been during this period it seems wrong to tar them all with the same brush. I’m sure most are honest and decent people.


----------



## Dom Traynor (Jan 15, 2022)

I got kicked out of the cubs for going to a Catholic church instead of CoE.


----------



## Dom Traynor (Jan 15, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> The Boy's Brigade has always given me the creeps for having more than a passing resemblance to the Hitler Youth.
> 
> View attachment 306019
> 
> View attachment 306020


I always thought they had quite strong links to the Orange Order as well...?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 15, 2022)

I remember my Akela talked about God for about five minutes once. Or he didn't use the word god, only, 'the man upstairs, whatever you want to call him'. That was the extent of Christian influence on my cub/scout experience. Maybe there was a church carol service once but I always loved those anyway.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 15, 2022)

Dom Traynor said:


> I always thought they had quite strong links to the Orange Order as well...?


And the Tory party. Well, here anyway.


----------



## Sue (Jan 15, 2022)

Dom Traynor said:


> I got kicked out of the cubs for going to a Catholic church instead of CoE.





Dom Traynor said:


> I always thought they had quite strong links to the Orange Order as well...?


The brownies/cubs in my town put up with the Catholic thing - it wasn't really mentioned but even as a kid, could feel the slight disapproval about the (Catholic) school I went to. 

I didn't know anyone who went to the GB/BB and it was kind of disapproved of. Was never sure why but maybe it was the Orange Order thing (though whether that was on 'their' side or 'ours'... 🤷‍♀️)


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 15, 2022)

I was never in the Scouts or Cubs.  I wasn’t interested in uniformed clubs.  This was probably my parents’ influence.  I don’t think they’d have stopped me, but I knew the disapproval.  It was the rolled eyes and references to Hitler Youth.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 15, 2022)

Dom Traynor said:


> I got kicked out of the cubs for going to a Catholic church instead of CoE.




how was your skipping?


----------



## JimW (Jan 15, 2022)

Dom Traynor said:


> I got kicked out of the cubs for going to a Catholic church instead of CoE.


Weird, my mum ran the cubs in our village for a while as the well-known only Catholic, that would have been seventies at a guess.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 15, 2022)

dessiato said:


> Based on the figures given earlier, and assuming from 1955 to 2020 there’s “only” been an average of between three and four convictions a year of scout leaders. Obviously it would be better if the number was zero. Given how many scouts, and leaders there must have been during this period it seems wrong to tar them all with the same brush. I’m sure most are honest and decent people.


That's just the convictions, of course. Who knows how many got away with it? 

The point I would want to make about that would be about the institution and its failings, not the individuals. Of course, most scout leaders are honest and decent people. Most priests aren't kiddie fiddlers either. But that doesn't mean the institutions don't have questions to answer about how they allowed this to happen on their watch.


----------



## Serge Forward (Jan 15, 2022)

I was in cubs for a bit. Playing dodge ball and stiggy staggy (local variation on British Bulldog, as I recall) was great, as was the bottles of corona pop at the end... but then we did a "church parade" (our family never set foot in a church, aside from weddings, funerals, etc) and I punched a sixer... and my days were numbered


----------



## seeformiles (Jan 15, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> The Boy's Brigade has always given me the creeps for having more than a passing resemblance to the Hitler Youth.
> 
> View attachment 306019
> 
> View attachment 306020



TBF Hitler nicked jdeas from both BB and Scouts for the HY uniform. Apparently BP did like the idea of a German Youth movement that promoted resourcefulness, health and public service but after closer examination wasn’t so keen on Hitler himself or the way things were going in the late 30s.


----------



## Plumdaff (Jan 15, 2022)

We had cubs, guides etc. split on heavily sectarian grounds in the 1980s. I went to the Catholic Brownies . And this wasn't Belfast, this was Warwickshire. I grew up with the impression I was banned from the Girl's Brigade being a Catholic, which I resented as I liked all the stick twirling they got up to at village fetes and the shinier uniforms.


----------



## Spymaster (Jan 15, 2022)

Dom Traynor said:


> I got kicked out of the cubs for going to a Catholic church instead of CoE.





Sue said:


> The brownies/cubs in my town put up with the Catholic thing ...



Catholic kids were very welcome in our pack/troop, and were also excused church parade which made the rest of us quite jealous.


----------



## A380 (Jan 15, 2022)




----------



## seeformiles (Jan 15, 2022)

Plumdaff said:


> We had cubs, guides etc. split on heavily sectarian grounds in the 1980s. I went to the Catholic Brownies . And this wasn't Belfast, this was Warwickshire. I grew up with the impression I was banned from the Girl's Brigade being a Catholic, which I resented as I liked all the stick twirling they got up to at village fetes and the shinier uniforms.



In NI, the scouts made a point of not being heavy on religion - just as well given the politics at the time.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 15, 2022)

ElizabethofYork said:


> Being "the spare" is an odd position.  You start out being well and truly in the spotlight and being treated as important and relevant,  and over the years you fade further and further into the background- still at the public expense.


He is really just a repository of spare organs should the actual important royals need some repair work and bits replaced


----------



## Badgers (Jan 15, 2022)




----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 15, 2022)

Our local cub and scout group are run by dads and it’s an excuse to drink around a campfire. I think things have moved in from the old scoutmaster nonce era

ETA the pack massively subsidises trips for kids , sometimes totally free for those who can’t contribute. My boy did 3 weeks in Argentina and Patagonia with his pack . They do good work locally as well


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jan 15, 2022)

I think I must be the only bloke on urban who went to cubs and fucking hated it. Mum wouldn't let me leave but I managed to get myself kicked out after some unpleasantness on a camping trip.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 15, 2022)

SpineyNorman said:


> I think I must be the only bloke on urban who went to cubs and fucking hated it. Mum wouldn't let me leave but I managed to get myself kicked out after some unpleasantness on a camping trip.


I wasn't mad keen. No idea what compelled me to join but I wasn't allowed to leave either. Of course eventually I just refused to go.


----------



## seeformiles (Jan 15, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> I wasn't mad keen. No idea what compelled me to join but I wasn't allowed to leave either. Of course eventually I just refused to go.



I stopped going when I was about 14 as I had got a band together and that felt like a better time all round. Mind you, did a “gig” at the Scout Hall before I left. From memory, set list included “Smoke on the Water”, “Stairway to Heaven”, “Right on, Fight on” (Pink Fairies cover), “Badge” and several originals 😀


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 15, 2022)

seeformiles said:


> I stopped going when I was about 14 as I had got a band together and that felt like a better time all round. Mind you, did a “gig” at the Scout Hall before I left. From memory, set list included “Smoke on the Water”, “Stairway to Heaven”, “Right on, Fight on” (Pink Fairies cover), “Badge” and several originals 😀


What didn't help was that none of my close mates joined. And I wanted to be out with them rather than giving up an evening for this regimented flag raising crap.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 15, 2022)

SpineyNorman said:


> I think I must be the only bloke on urban who went to cubs and fucking hated it. Mum wouldn't let me leave but I managed to get myself kicked out after some unpleasantness on a camping trip.


I lasted two weeks. Hated it instantly, was allowed to leave.


----------



## seeformiles (Jan 15, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> What didn't help was that none of my close mates joined. And I wanted to be out with them rather than giving up an evening for this regimented flag raising crap.



Indeed. The lure of the “rock ‘n’ roll” crowd was much more alluring - esp. since they had drugs 🙂


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 15, 2022)

I liked Brownies, hated Girl Guides. It was all traditional female role ideology and after sticking it out for two years, I told my parents I had had enough.


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jan 15, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> I think there's lots about the scouts that are good. Especially nowadays where kids just stare at screens for joy. It's a shame that it comes with a particular kind of indoctrination. It didn't work on me but it's there doing it's job.



Sometimes having early contact with entities that try to indoctrinate you, give you the understanding and mental reserves to fight it off.


----------



## surreybrowncap (Jan 15, 2022)




----------



## elbows (Jan 15, 2022)

SpineyNorman said:


> I think I must be the only bloke on urban who went to cubs and fucking hated it. Mum wouldn't let me leave but I managed to get myself kicked out after some unpleasantness on a camping trip.



I hated it but had no idea it was optional so I stuck it out but did not proceed to the scouts, thank fuck.

Reasons for hating it included hayfever, not loving sports, being bored out of my mind, and not appreciating uniforms and the level of discomfort they offered.

I went to one camp and managed to enjoy a few aspects of it but then I got to leave early because I got a massive splinter lodged under my fingernail and the practical skills of the cub leadership failed to dislodge it. The kids spent a lot of the time winding eachother up with ghost stories, culminating in me being the one brave enough to piss on a 'witches grave', only to later discover that the cross actually marked the spot where a previous camp had buried their toilet waste


----------



## JimW (Jan 15, 2022)

SpineyNorman said:


> I think I must be the only bloke on urban who went to cubs and fucking hated it. Mum wouldn't let me leave but I managed to get myself kicked out after some unpleasantness on a camping trip.


I went for a bit and then stopped bothering, liked the camping not fussed about the rest.


----------



## pogofish (Jan 15, 2022)

equationgirl said:


> I liked Brownies, hated Girl Guides. It was all traditional female role ideology and after sticking it out for two years, I told my arents I had had enough.



My mother was in the Guides during WW2 - she loved it (apart from church parade) but it never sounded very girly.  They were taught stuff like survival and camouflage manoeuvres on a local estate, recording vehicle movements to pass-on to the stay-behind/resistance should we be invaded and their sharp young eyes and ability to identify every aircraft type, Allied and Axis were highly valued. Members of her troupe were posted to anti-aircraft batteries (mostly manned by called-up WW1-age veterans) to help ensure they only shot down the enemies and after she passed a certain age, she was given a tin hat and a night posting to a firewatchers station on top of C&A (now the Central Travelodge) to help direct the response to air raids.

I think I also remember saying that cooking and knitting/dressmaking badges were things she was never good enough to attain..!


----------



## A380 (Jan 15, 2022)

Always amazed how so few ‘life time’ revolutionaries on here went to Woodcraft Folk as a kid. 

Span the world with friendship.


----------



## ice-is-forming (Jan 15, 2022)

friedaweed ! You have returned!


----------



## Spymaster (Jan 15, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> What didn't help was that none of my close mates joined. And I wanted to be out with them rather than giving up an evening for this regimented flag raising crap.



I can't remember any flag raising crap. We had the church parades at Easter and around xmas but that was about it. Otherwise it was just camping and games. I loved it. Same with air cadets. We went flying, shooting, did the DofE schemes, and got to hang out on operational air bases. It was fantastic fun. I'd do it again now if I could.


----------



## Sue (Jan 15, 2022)

A380 said:


> Always amazed how so few ‘life time’ revolutionaries on here went to Woodcraft Folk as a kid.
> 
> Span the world with friendship.


I'd never even heard of it till I was an adult. AFAIA it didn't exist where i grew up.


----------



## spitfire (Jan 15, 2022)

Plumdaff said:


> We had cubs, guides etc. split on heavily sectarian grounds in the 1980s. I went to the Catholic Brownies . And this wasn't Belfast, this was Warwickshire. I grew up with the impression I was banned from the Girl's Brigade being a Catholic, which I resented as I liked all the stick twirling they got up to at village fetes and the shinier uniforms.



I was in the cubs in Warks (late 70s), an atheist from an Irish Republican family and no one batted an eye lid. I was excused church duties but went along anyway sometimes.

Then moved to Ireland and after some negotiations joined the CBSI (Catholic Boy Scouts Ireland), later moving on to Sea Scouts (heavily Protestant), again after some negotiations about religious stuff. They all just seemed happy to have kids interested to join wherever I went.

Then I joined the FCA (Irish TA), where they give you a gun as well as a uniform so there may be something to the militaristic side of things, I loved it, lol. 

eta. oh yeah: on topic, there was no noncing in my experience.


----------



## seeformiles (Jan 15, 2022)

Plumdaff said:


> We had cubs, guides etc. split on heavily sectarian grounds in the 1980s. I went to the Catholic Brownies . And this wasn't Belfast, this was Warwickshire. I grew up with the impression I was banned from the Girl's Brigade being a Catholic, which I resented as I liked all the stick twirling they got up to at village fetes and the shinier uniforms.



I came across the CBSI (Catholic Boy Scouts of Ireland) at a jamboree - even though they had regular Scouts in the ROI they were for those parents who felt they weren’t quite Catholic enough. My Aunt was the big cheese for their German Catholic Girl Guide counterparts - a pious miserable bunch who acted (at my cousin’s wedding at least) as if, at any given moment, the wrath of the Lord was about to rain down upon them.


----------



## ice-is-forming (Jan 15, 2022)

When I was growing up my best friends parents were brown owl then promoted to  arkala of cubs. & her dad was a venture scout master.

We went to the brownies at the same church hall,  and my first badge was for shining shoes, then maybe washing up, keeping my gerbil alive..  

But cos of her parents we went on cub and scout camp every summer, was great  they did lots more muddy stuff than at brownie camp plus their den was in an underground air raid shelter...


----------



## _Russ_ (Jan 15, 2022)

Cubs and scouts never appealed, I waited till I _looked_ old enough and joined Army Cadets ... great fun


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 15, 2022)

pogofish said:


> My mother was in the Guides during WW2 - she loved it (apart from church parade) but it never sounded very girly.  They were taught stuff like survival and camouflage manoeuvres on a local estate, recording vehicle movements to pass-on to the stay-behind/resistance should we be invaded and their sharp young eyes and ability to identify every aircraft type, Allied and Axis were highly valued. Members of her troupe were posted to anti-aircraft batteries (mostly manned by called-up WW1-age veterans) to help ensure they only shot down the enemies and after she passed a certain age, she was given a tin hat and a night posting to a firewatchers station on top of C&A (now the Central Travelodge) to help direct the response to air raids.
> 
> I think I also remember saying that cooking and knitting/dressmaking badges were things she was never good enough to attain..!


Had I had the same experiences as your mother I would definitely have enjoyed it more.

I got knitting, sewing, cooking and other traditional female role stuff, nothing outside of that. I remember getting a look at the handbook of badges once and there was so much cool stuff in there, and most of it was never even spoken about by the leaders.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 15, 2022)

I see he's after documents from Giuffre's therapist and is pushing on the false memories issue (along with wanting to interview her husband).  If it ever gets to a trial you could see that possibly working for him, though the basics of her story about being trafficked for sex are now matters of fact.  Main thing seems to be the usual filthy trick of saying 'if you carry on with this we'll expose every bit of your life and mental health to public scrutiny'.  Grim stuff.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 15, 2022)

SpineyNorman said:


> I think I must be the only bloke on urban who went to cubs and fucking hated it. Mum wouldn't let me leave but I managed to get myself kicked out after some unpleasantness on a camping trip.






Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Hated Cubs from day one, walked in and the arkela hauls me up in front of everyone, I am in jeans and trainers, “We wear short trousers and proper shoes here!” Stuck it out for a couple of months, passed over for any badges, my mum told her I wanted to leave, she persuaded us to go to her house to do the knots badge, we hadn’t been shown how to do knots, I think the miserable fucker had ideas of making me feel foolish. So we’re there in her front room and she’s telling me to do a half-hinch, me fucking scoobied, “a half-hinch, half-hinch, you can’t have a badge if you can’t do a half-hinch!”
> 
> My mum, bless her leans over, “I think she means half hitch, you know, like how you tie a boat up.”
> 
> ...


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 15, 2022)

Wilf said:


> I see he's after documents from Giuffre's therapist and is pushing on the false memories issue (along with wanting to interview her husband).  If it ever gets to a trial you could see that possibly working for him, though the basics of her story about being trafficked for sex are now matters of fact.  Main thing seems to be the usual filthy trick of saying 'if you carry on with this we'll expose every bit of your life and mental health to public scrutiny'.  Grim stuff.




It worked so well for Weinstein and Maxwell, go for it Andy!


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 15, 2022)

Wilf said:


> I see he's after documents from Giuffre's therapist and is pushing on the false memories issue (along with wanting to interview her husband).  If it ever gets to a trial you could see that possibly working for him, though the basics of her story about being trafficked for sex are now matters of fact.  Main thing seems to be the usual filthy trick of saying 'if you carry on with this we'll expose every bit of your life and mental health to public scrutiny'.  Grim stuff.


I don't see it working unless the therapist has a history of planting false memories. She's spoken about the psychological effects on her, such as PTSD, nightmares, and no doubt her husband can testify to that, but do they honestly think he will say anything else? It's not some get rich scheme they cooked up between the two of them. It's the effects of trauma.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 15, 2022)

equationgirl said:


> I don't see it working unless the therapist has a history of planting false memories. She's spoken about the psychological effects on her, such as PTSD, nightmares, and no doubt her husband can testify to that, but do they honestly think he will say anything else? It's not some get rich scheme they cooked up between the two of them. It's the effects of trauma.


Yeah, it's a 'playbook' thing and a statement of how vile they will be if it goes to court.  Quite likely to be about shaping the agenda for a settlement ('if you press on, this is that we'll do to you'').


----------



## UrbaneFox (Jan 15, 2022)

Might HWCS be asked about his own sexual history, post divorce from Fergie?

Why hasn't he wheeled out details of a long-term relationship with someone / I'm not into one night stands /  even "We divorced but always stayed together' stuff.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 15, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> I can't remember any flag raising crap. We had the church parades at Easter and around xmas but that was about it. Otherwise it was just camping and games. I loved it. Same with air cadets. We went flying, shooting, did the DofE schemes, and got to hang out on operational air bases. It was fantastic fun. I'd do it now if I could.



i was gliding in blaniks and hanging around at Dishforth base when i was 14 in the scouts. and going up in the gliding clubs chipmunk tow and taking the controls was a bit special


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 15, 2022)

/ back to noncing discussion


----------



## weltweit (Jan 15, 2022)

not-bono-ever said:


> / back to noncing discussion


Yes please. 

I keep seeing updates and think something has happened in the HWCS case only to find some cub scout anecdote. 

Get your own thread (please)


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jan 15, 2022)

elbows said:


> I hated it but had no idea it was optional so I stuck it out but did not proceed to the scouts, thank fuck.
> 
> Reasons for hating it included hayfever, not loving sports, being bored out of my mind, and not appreciating uniforms and the level of discomfort they offered.
> 
> I went to one camp and managed to enjoy a few aspects of it but then I got to leave early because I got a massive splinter lodged under my fingernail and the practical skills of the cub leadership failed to dislodge it. The kids spent a lot of the time winding eachother up with ghost stories, culminating in me being the one brave enough to piss on a 'witches grave', only to later discover that the cross actually marked the spot where a previous camp had buried their toilet waste


I just found it really boring to be honest, whenever I was there I was just thinking about how much more fun I could be having out with my mates on my bike or whatever. The kids there tended to be the more boring ones from school too.

Finally got kicked out cos there was this kid in our tent who got his sleeping bag wet. We all lent him blankets so he was ok but he kept getting in my sleeping bag with me. After a few times I said if he did it again I'd kick his head in. He did it again with predictable consequences (to be clear I am definitely not a hard man but until I was about 12 I was always the biggest kid in my year at school which gave me a certain advantage)


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jan 15, 2022)

Sorry didn't see the last few posts


----------



## JimW (Jan 15, 2022)

weltweit said:


> Yes please.
> 
> I keep seeing updates and think something has happened in the HWCS case only to find some cub scout anecdote.
> 
> Get your own thread (please)


You need to Be Prepared for that eventuality, welty.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 15, 2022)

SpineyNorman said:


> Sorry didn't see the last few posts


 
a full formal apology statement is in order


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 15, 2022)

I think it's somewhat unfair to describe the kids as boring just because they're not into what you were into at the time SpineyNorman .


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 15, 2022)

Wilf said:


> I see he's after documents from Giuffre's therapist and is pushing on the false memories issue (along with wanting to interview her husband).  If it ever gets to a trial you could see that possibly working for him, though the basics of her story about being trafficked for sex are now matters of fact.  Main thing seems to be the usual filthy trick of saying 'if you carry on with this we'll expose every bit of your life and mental health to public scrutiny'.  Grim stuff.


“Let us talk to the men who know her better than she does”


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 15, 2022)

Only boring people are bored.


----------



## Athos (Jan 15, 2022)

Orang Utan said:


> “Let us talk to the men who know her better than she does”


The psychologist is a woman.

And I suspect the point of involving her is in the hope that there's no reference to Andrew in the notes of her sessions with Virginia Giuffre, which they'll say is becuase it was something the plaintiff invented later.


----------



## kenny g (Jan 15, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> Only boring people are bored.


Reminds me of a mate whose dad had served a long stretch and would go completely ballistic if his son mentioned being bored. "If you want to be bored sit in a cell for 23 hours a day".


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 15, 2022)

Athos said:


> The psychologist is a woman.
> 
> And I suspect the point of involving her is in the hope that there's no reference to Andrew in the notes, which they'll say is becuase it was something she invented later.


This.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 15, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> Only boring people are bored.


have I told you at length about my rock collection?


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 15, 2022)

two sheds said:


> have I told you at length about my rock collection?


It feels like it.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 15, 2022)




----------



## equationgirl (Jan 15, 2022)

two sheds said:


>


Do you have anything blue or purple?


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 15, 2022)

equationgirl said:


> Do you have anything blue or purple?


Prose.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 15, 2022)

equationgirl said:


> Do you have anything blue or purple?


He's a toker praetexta


----------



## elbows (Jan 15, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> Only boring people are bored.



From teenage years upwards I have rarely been bored because I either get to do things that actually interest me, or I can distract myself by subverting authority, heckling etc, even if its just done silently inside my mind. But those possibilities hadnt really occurred to me during my time in the cubs, well maybe a little bit towards the end.

The only really exciting thing that happened in cubs was when playing indoor football someone managed to hit a fluorescent tube in a manner that caused it to fall from a great height and smash dramatically. And even then I think it was the dramatic reaction from the adults that made it more interesting, we had to freeze where we were until they were happy that the many fragments of doom had been dealt with.

That and random vomiting from some poor unfortunate child. Its a wonder some of them didnt earn a badge for it.


----------



## Ĝasper (Jan 15, 2022)

My thoughts are with the victims, and my attempts to use this case to bring down the monarchy and super rich are by no means intended to belittle their struggle, but rather to amplify it.

Prince Andrew had been disgraced and the people have already reached their own guilty verdict - the evidence is out there.

What's the worst dirt that we've got on Prince Charles and Prince William?


----------



## elbows (Jan 15, 2022)

Ĝasper said:


> My thoughts are with the victims, and my attempts to use this case to bring down the monarchy and super rich are by no means intended to belittle their struggle, but rather to amplify it.
> 
> Prince Andrew had been disgraced and the people have already reached their own guilty verdict - the evidence is out there.
> 
> What's the worst dirt that we've got on Prince Charles and Prince William?



Well I dont usually miss the chance to bring up Williams public comments early in the pandemic.



> "Does it seem quite dramatic about coronavirus at the moment? Is it being a little bit hyped up do you think in the media?" he asked.
> 
> He went on to joke: "By the way, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge are spreading coronavirus, Sorry. We’re keeping an eye on that, so do tell us if we need to stop."





> And to add salt to the wounds, Prince William himself later revealed that he had in fact caught Covid-19 shortly afterwards.
> 
> He didn't tell the public at the time because the Royal Family didn't want to "alarm the nation," particularly after both Prince Charles and Prime Minister Boris Johnson were fighting the disease at the time.











						This week in 2020, Prince William joked about spreading Covid-19 during his visit to Ireland
					

On 3 March 2020, there were a total of two confirmed cases of Covid-19 in the Republic of Ireland.




					www.irishpost.com


----------



## tim (Jan 15, 2022)

rubbershoes said:


> He choose to get away from the rest of the family and deserves some credit for that



Sadly, he didn't choose to get away from the media.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 15, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> I can't remember any flag raising crap. We had the church parades at Easter and around xmas but that was about it. Otherwise it was just camping and games. I loved it. Same with air cadets. We went flying, shooting, did the DofE schemes, and got to hang out on operational air bases. It was fantastic fun. I'd do it again now if I could.



There was this weird flag raising thing. I can’t remember if it was just when there was a new initiation or at every meet but I remember it enough to feel it was the latter. Erect the frame, pull up the flag, form a circle and chant the Cub Scout promise. That I did this voluntarily is lost on me.


----------



## 1927 (Jan 15, 2022)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I lasted two weeks. Hated it instantly, was allowed to leave.


Were you even allowed to join? If not you weren't allowed to leave!


----------



## friedaweed (Jan 15, 2022)

ice-is-forming said:


> friedaweed ! You have returned!


----------



## friedaweed (Jan 15, 2022)

UrbaneFox said:


> Might HWCS be asked about his own sexual history, post divorce from Fergie?
> 
> Why hasn't he wheeled out details of a long-term relationship with someone / I'm not into one night stands /  even "We divorced but always stayed together' stuff.


Yep like "Can you explain why in the British media a satirical comedy programme, watched by millions of people every week, portrayed you as a character named Randy Andy?"

I wonder what other skeletons may surface as we get closer to boiling point too.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 15, 2022)

1927 said:


> Were you even allowed to join? If not you weren't allowed to leave!


I have no idea. I know that I went along for a couple of weeks and then I didn't cos I didn't want to. I was only a little kid. 

Do they give you a test?

Looking them up, it appears they no longer demand any kind of attitude towards a god, but they do still expect you to promise to 'do your duty to the Queen'. Fuck that for a game of soldiers.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 15, 2022)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I have no idea. I know that I went along for a couple of weeks and then I didn't cos I didn't want to. I was only a little kid.
> 
> Do they give you a test?
> 
> Looking them up, it appears they no longer demand any kind of attitude towards a god, but they do still expect you to promise to 'do your duty to the Queen'. Fuck that for a game of soldiers.


It is a sort of game of soldiers.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 15, 2022)

friedaweed said:


> Yep like "Can you explain why in the British media a satirical comedy programme, watched by millions of people every week, portrayed you as a character named Randy Andy?"
> 
> I wonder what other skeletons may surface as we get closer to boiling point too.


It wasn’t just Spitting Image.

There has to be a better copy of this out there somewhere:


----------



## Spymaster (Jan 15, 2022)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Looking them up, it appears they no longer demand any kind of attitude towards a god, but they do still expect you to promise to 'do your duty to the Queen'. Fuck that for a game of soldiers.



That's all nonsense mumbo-jumbo though, isn't it?

I promised to "do my duty to god, and to the queen" but they were just words I said as a kid so I could go camping with my mates, and were forgotten 10 minutes later.

I can't imagine things have changed much 40 years on.

(OK; more than 40 years )


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 15, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> It wasn’t just Spitting Image.
> 
> There has to be a better copy of this out there somewhere:



He was well-rehearsed in those days. Look at how he bats his eyelids - and then looks towards the audience at the end for the effect. 

Blech.


----------



## pogofish (Jan 15, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> There was this weird flag raising thing. I can’t remember if it was just when there was a new initiation or at every meet but I remember it enough to feel it was the latter. Erect the frame, pull up the flag, form a circle and chant the Cub Scout promise. That I did this voluntarily is lost on me.



The "Sundown Ceremony" perhaps? Knocked from the early RAF. I think it goes back to the days before night flying, to mark the official end of flight operations for the day and the time when every pilot who was coming back alive had to have their wheels on the ground by.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 15, 2022)

pogofish said:


> The "Sundown Ceremony" perhaps? Knocked from the early RAF. I think it goes back to the days before night flying, to mark the official end of flight operations for the day and the time when every pilot who was coming back alive had to have their wheels on the ground by.


It was part and parcel of it. Plenty of evidence on youtube although I guess not all packs were the same.


----------



## pogofish (Jan 15, 2022)

friedaweed said:


> Yep like "Can you explain why in the British media a satirical comedy programme, watched by millions of people every week, portrayed you as a character named Randy Andy?"
> 
> I wonder what other skeletons may surface as we get closer to boiling point too.



Back in the early 80s, Andy was frequently in the tabloids seen out in the smarter end of London's clubland, often enjoying himself with some abandon and always a pretty young lady of "good family" or a rising young actress (eg Koo Stark) on his arm. His siblings however were staid by comparison - The knickname "Randy Andy" was quickly appended!


----------



## friedaweed (Jan 15, 2022)

pogofish said:


> Back in the early 80s, Andy was frequently in the tabloids seen out in the smarter end of London's clubland, often enjoying himself with some abandon and always a pretty young lady of "good family" or a rising young actress (eg Koo Stark) on his arm. His siblings however were staid by comparison - The knickname "Randy Andy" was quickly appended!


I'd forgotten about Koo Stark. 

Prince Andrew’s ex-girlfriend Koo Stark told by Royal Family she was on IRA hitlist during relationship


----------



## pogofish (Jan 15, 2022)

friedaweed said:


> I'd forgotten about Koo Stark.
> 
> Prince Andrew’s ex-girlfriend Koo Stark told by Royal Family she was on IRA hitlist during relationship



Yup - back then, if he was seen with the same woman more than a couple of times, the tabloids were talking wedding plans but overall he got it pretty easy and IIRC played-up to the image. The press played along too, in a "young modern Prince and war hero, enjoying the fruits of his victory" sort of way. There was no competition either. Charles was just Charles - a bit odd and Edward was seen as bookish and more into am-dram instead of a few drams and maybe (in a whisper) gay. It was a very long time before they turned on him and long after they went for Sarah Ferguson.


----------



## kenny g (Jan 15, 2022)

The fact that at the age of 21 he went for a 24 year old somewhat detracts from the allegations of noncery.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 15, 2022)

kenny g said:


> The fact that at the age of 21 he went for a 24 year old somewhat detracts from the allegations of noncery.


----------



## petee (Jan 15, 2022)

this talk of religious exclusion in uk scouting sounds weird to my american ears, even 50+years ago there was a program for each and every in the BSA.
here's what you can get now:









						Chart of Religious Emblems | Boy Scouts of America
					

This chart lists all Religious Emblems Programs available to members of the Boy Scouts of America. Images of the medals, where available, may be viewed by clicking the award’s name. African Methodist Episcopal Church Local council service center or P.R.A.Y.11123 S. Towne Square, Suite BSt...




					www.scouting.org


----------



## Raheem (Jan 15, 2022)

kenny g said:


> The fact that at the age of 21 he went for a 24 year old somewhat detracts from the allegations of noncery.


What, as in 24 and 14 makes 19 on average? It doesn't work like that.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 15, 2022)

kenny g said:


> The fact that at the age of 21 he went for a 24 year old somewhat detracts from the allegations of noncery.


WTF?


----------



## Dom Traynor (Jan 15, 2022)

JimW said:


> Weird, my mum ran the cubs in our village for a while as the well-known only Catholic, that would have been seventies at a guess.


Yeah this was early Eighties. I think it was an individual troop thing, I remember my mum asking me if I wanted to find another troop instead and I was over it by that point.


----------



## xenon (Jan 15, 2022)

kenny g said:


> The fact that at the age of 21 he went for a 24 year old somewhat detracts from the allegations of noncery.



 At the age of 41, he allegedly went for a trafficked 17 YO. Hence  whereby the label of noncery is being applied, not to indicate interest in prepubesent girls but rather in the general usage for sexual assaulters.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 15, 2022)

xenon said:


> At the age of 41, he allegedly went for a trafficked 17 YO. Hence  whereby the label of noncery is being applied, not to indicate interest in prepubesent girls but rather in the general usage for sexual assaulters.


Any thoughts, Kenny g?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 15, 2022)

As shittily misogynistic and patriarchal as our culture is, I'm pretty sure we have so far avoided instituting a rape offset credit scheme.


----------



## kenny g (Jan 15, 2022)

Wilf said:


> Any thoughts, Kenny g?


A few. On the current information he doesn't come across as a paedo.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 15, 2022)

kenny g said:


> A few. On the current information he doesn't come across as a paedo.


What are your thoughts on him coming across as an entitled aristo exploiting trafficked girls?


----------



## kenny g (Jan 15, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> What are your thoughts on him coming across as an entitled aristo exploiting trafficked girls?


Probably fits that category.


----------



## Calamity1971 (Jan 15, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> What are your thoughts on him coming across as an entitled aristo exploiting trafficked girls?


Not sure I want anymore thoughts from kenny g  tbh.


----------



## keybored (Jan 15, 2022)

kenny g said:


> The fact that at the age of 21 he went for a 24 year old somewhat detracts from the allegations of noncery.


And people often seem to forget that Harold Shipman didn't murder a lot more people than he did murder.


----------



## eatmorecheese (Jan 15, 2022)

keybored said:


> And people often seem to forget that Harold Shipman didn't murder a lot more people than he did murder.


Exactly. Think of how many constituents Cyril Smith helped in his career and he didn't touch their kids.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 15, 2022)

kenny g said:


> The fact that at the age of 21 he went for a 24 year old somewhat detracts from the allegations of noncery.


it fucking doesn't


----------



## Spymaster (Jan 15, 2022)

kenny g said:


> The fact that at the age of 21 he went for a 24 year old somewhat detracts from the allegations of noncery.



It doesn't really. 

There's a misunderstanding of "nonce". Many people consider a nonce to be a child molester, but that's not the case. I'm happy to be corrected ( tonysingh ) but I believe that the term "nonce" is prison slang for sex criminals generally. 

A man who uses his status or power to seduce young women who wouldn't otherwise fuck him, is (almost?) as much of a sex criminal as a street rapist. 

Nonce. 

If the cap fits ....


----------



## tonysingh (Jan 15, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> It doesn't really.
> 
> There's a misunderstanding of "nonce". Many people consider a nonce to be a child molester, but that's not the case. I'm happy to be corrected ( tonysingh ) but I believe that the term "nonce" is prison slang for sex criminals generally.
> 
> ...



Nonce would be specifically child sex offences. Others would be a beast etc.

Eta, I've never heard nonce or its root used for anything other than a paedophile or suspect thereof


----------



## a_chap (Jan 15, 2022)

tonysingh said:


> Eta, I've never heard nonce or its root used for anything other than a paedophile or suspect thereof



Rather unfortunately, I have to work with nonces occasionally










						Cryptographic nonce - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				





I *really *wished they'd found another term for it


----------



## Spymaster (Jan 15, 2022)

tonysingh said:


> Nonce would be specifically child sex offences. Others would be a beast etc.
> 
> Eta, I've never heard nonce or its root used for anything other than a paedophile or suspect thereof



Cheers. 

Every day's a school day, but isn't it the case that rapists of adults might also find themselves on "the nonce wing"?


----------



## tonysingh (Jan 15, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> Cheers.
> 
> Every day's a school day, but isn't it the case that rapists of adults might also find themselves on "the nonce wing"?



Oh rapists will end on the nonce wing for sure but even then it's largely called other names like the VP wing, the cucumbers etc. Cucumbers because rhyming slang for numbers which refers to the prison rule number 43 that separates sex offenders, baby killers,  granny bashers,  grasses, pad thieves etc from us decent violent criminals. 😉


----------



## Wilf (Jan 16, 2022)

kenny g said:


> A few. On the current information he doesn't come across as a paedo.


I'm really just wondering why you want to get into this?


----------



## Spymaster (Jan 16, 2022)

tonysingh said:


> Oh rapists will end on the nonce wing for sure but even then it's largely called other names like the VP wing, ...



VP?


----------



## tonysingh (Jan 16, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> VP?



Vulnerable Prisoner


----------



## Dom Traynor (Jan 16, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> VP?


Voracious Prince


----------



## iona (Jan 16, 2022)

Visibly Perspiring


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 16, 2022)

i thought nonce was originally foisted as an anti gay thing  from yore - might be wrong here tho


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 16, 2022)

kenny g said:


> Probably fits that category.


Jesus.

Let's argue about what type of exploitation was going on with rich men and poor girls from from troubled backgrounds, why not, because definitions are so much more important than the wrongs the definitions are attempting to grasp.


----------



## tonysingh (Jan 16, 2022)

not-bono-ever said:


> i thought nonce was originally foisted as an anti gay thing  from yore - might be wrong here tho



Nonce = bacon bonce = nonsense crime i.e a crime that makes no sense to the usual prisoner. Bacon is also a term for a child sex offender. Bonce is a ye olde tyme word for head.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 16, 2022)

tonysingh said:


> nonsense crime i.e a crime that makes no sense to the usual prisoner.


what I heard from a mate who'd been inside, too.

I asked him how you were with other prisoners if you were inside for dealing spliff. "Popular"


----------



## tonysingh (Jan 16, 2022)

two sheds said:


> what I heard from a mate who'd been inside, too.



Here's hoping he (or she tbf) is doing better now.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Jan 16, 2022)

not-bono-ever said:


> i thought nonce was originally foisted as an anti gay thing  from yore - might be wrong here tho



never heard / read of it in that context, other than sex offenders against (male) children.

although until certain points in the UK, any gay sex activity was a sex crime, or gay sex activity with anyone under 21 was.

chambers dictionary says 'ety uncertain'


----------



## two sheds (Jan 16, 2022)

tonysingh said:


> Here's hoping he (or she tbf) is doing better now.


Not seen him for a while but yep was taxi driving when I last met him and seemed happy enough.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 16, 2022)

Think "nonce" might be based, originally, on "ponce", originally meaning pimp. Possibly also combined with the idea of nonsense, or with the original meaning of "nonce", which was a "one-off" (a specific incident, as opposed to the ongoing behaviour of a pimp).


----------



## spitfire (Jan 16, 2022)

Raheem said:


> That's the same at the beginning and different at the end. It's an anti-rhyme.



The body of evidence grows.


----------



## miktheword (Jan 16, 2022)

always thought nonce was 'Not On Normal Courtyard Exercise' or NON Criminal Element /Enterprise

indicating vulnerable prisoners and yeah, bacon being the slang as said above.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 16, 2022)

tonysingh said:


> Nonce would be specifically child sex offences. Others would be a beast etc.
> 
> Eta, I've never heard nonce or its root used for anything other than a paedophile or suspect thereof



The best explanation I've had is that it's an acronym for folk who go on the numbers (the special wing for their own protection from the rest of the estate). Which is usually rape or child abuse cases.
Not On Normal Courtyard Exercise. NONCE.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 16, 2022)

miktheword said:


> always thought nonce was 'Not On Normal Courtyard Exercise' or NON Criminal Element /Enterprise
> 
> indicating vulnerable prisoners and yeah, bacon being the slang as said above.


Beaten to it.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 16, 2022)

Acronym-based etymologies are usually (though not always) cobblers.


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Jan 16, 2022)

two sheds said:


> Not seen him for a while but yep was taxi driving when I last met him and seemed happy enough.


I thought taxi drivers had to pass a DBS check to get their taxi licence?


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 16, 2022)

Raheem said:


> Acronym-based etymologies are usually (though not always) cobblers.



I said it was the best explanation I’ve heard. Give us a better one.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 16, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> I said it was the best explanation I’ve heard. Give us a better one.


Have done. Scroll up.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 16, 2022)

Raheem said:


> Have done. Scroll up.



Because it sounds like ponce? Which specifically means a pimp. I’m not convinced.


----------



## ouirdeaux (Jan 16, 2022)

I have no more idea of the derivation than anyone else, but I'm sure the acronym's bollocks. Because, as has been said, they pretty much always are. See also alleged etymologies involving ships.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 16, 2022)

Nonce is based on fairly old English, but in the past 100 years or so in London has been used for sex criminal, then moved more to child sex criminal. In the 60’s was very much related to ponce, as both indicated ‘less than a real man’.


----------



## keybored (Jan 16, 2022)

ouirdeaux said:


> I have no more idea of the derivation than anyone else, but I'm sure the acronym's bollocks. Because, as has been said, they pretty much always are. See also alleged etymologies involving ships.


Looks like one of them there backronyms.

Another explanation I've been given was that's it's a word for someone who's been convicted of "nonsense crimes", as in crimes that don't result in any financial reward and are therefore nonsensical. But that sounds unlikely too, since it could cover many other offences (like a lot of murders or arsons).


----------



## two sheds (Jan 16, 2022)

AnnO'Neemus said:


> I thought taxi drivers had to pass a DBS check to get their taxi licence?


No idea, this was 1990s though - I actually met him while he was driving.


----------



## maomao (Jan 16, 2022)

Sparked by earlier discussion on this thread I decided to google the origin of the word nonce and was particularly impressed by the 'people also search for' results:


----------



## keybored (Jan 16, 2022)

maomao said:


> Sparked by earlier discussion on this thread I decided to google the origin of the word nonce and was particularly impressed by the 'people also search for' results:
> 
> View attachment 306140



Nuance Communications sacking their SEO people tomorrow.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 16, 2022)

A really good article IMO. Royal or otherwise, sex abuse stories have a grim familiarity in the wielding of male power | Sonia Sodha


----------



## pogofish (Jan 16, 2022)

AnnO'Neemus said:


> I thought taxi drivers had to pass a DBS check to get their taxi licence?



It has only been widespread since 2012 and even then a taxi/private hire DBS would only cover offences relevant to working with children and vulnerable people.  Other classes of offence would not be considered.

Pre-2012, only drivers who would mainly be working with children/vulnerable people had to apply.


----------



## seeformiles (Jan 16, 2022)

pogofish said:


> It has only been widespread since 2012 and even then a taxi/private hire DBS would only cover offences relevant to working with children and vulnerable people.  Other classes of offence would not be considered.
> 
> Pre-2012, only drivers who would mainly be working with children/vulnerable people had to apply.



In a previous job working at a Uni with 70% female students we put out to tender a proposal to have a preferred trusted taxi service that we could recommend to everyone on campus with confidence. An absolutely essential and non-negotiable requirement (before size of fleet, DDA compliance, etc.) was that all drivers be DBS checked. Several companies dropped out at that stage but happy to say that the winner went to very impressive lengths on all requirements.


----------



## Peter Painter (Jan 16, 2022)

All this discussion of the word 'nonce', it's the word, 'paedophile', that irritates me. It literally means, lover of children.

Why can't they instead just be referred to as child abusers? 

It's not that important, I know. Just a little thing that I find a bit irritating.


----------



## keybored (Jan 16, 2022)

Peter Painter said:


> All this discussion of the word 'nonce', it's the word, 'paedophile', that irritates me. It literally means, lover of children.


It doesn't, any more than "hydrophilia" means "a love of water".


----------



## kabbes (Jan 16, 2022)

Peter Painter said:


> All this discussion of the word 'nonce', it's the word, 'paedophile', that irritates me. It literally means, lover of children.
> 
> Why can't they instead just be referred to as child abusers?
> 
> It's not that important, I know. Just a little thing that I find a bit irritating.


Greek contains different words for different type of love, which are not directly translatable.  Love in the sense of affection and caring is αγάπη (agapi).  Φιλος means friend, bonding, connection.  If you want to be literal, peodophile refers to something like one who seeks a bond with children.  It’s not one who loves children in the context you are meaning.

(Strictly, since erotic love is έρως, which is where we get the word erotic from, paraphilias should probably be paraeroticas.  But English has absorbed the suffix -philia for this purpose, and I think that’s fine.)


----------



## Peter Painter (Jan 16, 2022)

keybored said:


> It doesn't, any more than "hydrophilia" means "a love of water".





kabbes said:


> Greek contains different words for different type of love, which are not directly translatable.  Love in the sense of affection and caring is αγάπη (agapi).  Φιλί means friend, bonding, connection.  If you want to be literal, peodophile refers to something like one who seeks a bond with children.  It’s not one who loves children in the context you are meaning.



Great news, thanks. I can stop being irritated by that then!


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Jan 16, 2022)

AnnO'Neemus said:


> I thought taxi drivers had to pass a DBS check to get their taxi licence?





pogofish said:


> It has only been widespread since 2012 and even then a taxi/private hire DBS would only cover offences relevant to working with children and vulnerable people. Other classes of offence would not be considered.
> 
> Pre-2012, only drivers who would mainly be working with children/vulnerable people had to apply.



Yes.

It's been a while since I've been involved in such things (in my case organising school transport for the county education department, so it was the equivalent of full DBS at the time - we could consider 'spent' convictions, but most taxi licensing authorities didn't at that time - opinion varied as to whether taxi licensing authorities had the legal power to do so - I think this got clarified.)

A DBS check does not mean that a person with any conviction, no matter how long ago or how minor will be automatically be disqualified from the job.  There are (a small number of) people who are barred from working with children / vulnerable people, but (for example) a conviction for shoplifting will not cause that...

In most cases DBS will provide information to allow potential employers / licensing authorities to make an informed decision.   This is one council's policy on taxi licensing and past convictions.


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Jan 16, 2022)

Puddy_Tat said:


> Yes.
> 
> It's been a while since I've been involved in such things (in my case organising school transport for the county education department, so it was the equivalent of full DBS at the time - we could consider 'spent' convictions, but most taxi licensing authorities didn't at that time - opinion varied as to whether taxi licensing authorities had the legal power to do so - I think this got clarified.)
> 
> ...


Yeah, I know that people with spent/minor convictions could pass a regular DBS check (but not an enhanced DBS check), and that the nature of the offence was taken into consideration, but I kind of assumed that if an offence was serious enough to warrant jail time then someone wouldn't pass a DBS check?


----------



## kenny g (Jan 16, 2022)

AnnO'Neemus said:


> Yeah, I know that people with spent/minor convictions could pass a regular DBS check (but not an enhanced DBS check), and that the nature of the offence was taken into consideration, but I kind of assumed that if an offence was serious enough to warrant jail time then someone wouldn't pass a DBS check?


It is complicated...and enhanced DBS do not necessarily show all convictions. There have been a couple of supreme court judgements that forced the government's hands. This guide looks up to date.  DBS filtering guide


----------



## tim (Jan 16, 2022)

tonysingh said:


> Nonce = bacon bonce = nonsense crime i.e a crime that makes no sense to the usual prisoner. Bacon is also a term for a child sex offender. Bonce is a ye olde tyme word for head.



You are the Frank Muir of these boards.


----------



## LDC (Jan 16, 2022)

AnnO'Neemus said:


> Yeah, I know that people with spent/minor convictions could pass a regular DBS check (but not an enhanced DBS check), and that the nature of the offence was taken into consideration, but I kind of assumed that if an offence was serious enough to warrant jail time then someone wouldn't pass a DBS check?



There's not such a thing as passing or failing a DBS check. It's up to the employer as to whether they will employ you or not depending on what comes back on your record and their policies etc.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 16, 2022)

tim said:


> You are the Frank Muir of these boards.
> 
> View attachment 306246


Fits geographically!


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Jan 16, 2022)

seeformiles said:


> In a previous job working at a Uni with 70% female students we put out to tender a proposal to have a preferred trusted taxi service that we could recommend to everyone on campus with confidence. An absolutely essential and non-negotiable requirement (before size of fleet, DDA compliance, etc.) was that all drivers be DBS checked. Several companies dropped out at that stage but happy to say that the winner went to very impressive lengths on all requirements.


Yeah, can understand the concerns. That's why I was surprised to read of the taxi driver friend who'd been inside above, because I was working on two assumptions ie private hire/ taxi drivers had to be DBS checked (which I further assumed to be enhanced as private hire/ taxi companies often get contracts to do school runs for eg disabled children), and that someone who'd been inside wouldn't pass a DBS check.

It's kind of been reassuring to me, as a single woman getting in private hire cars and taxis by myself. 

When I moved to London years ago, you'd get guys in cars outside bars and clubs going 'Taxi?' and I'd never get in one. And then I tried to get a private hire car near where I was living in Shepherd's Bush and there was no company livery stuck on the doors or bonnet, there was no private hire badge fixed to the back of the car and I refused to get in.

It's happened to me here in Manchester a couple of times recently, when I've been travelling alone, I never get in unmarked vehicles, even I call up and say an unmarked vehicles turned up and control goes 'Sorry, he's got a new car'. 

No private hire badge and/or company livery, no fare.

And I felt safe(r) in the knowledge that private hire/taxi drivers had to be (or so I assumed) DBS checked and hadn't ever been convicted of a serious offence.

But worrying to know my assumptions have been wrong. 

Don't get me wrong, rehabilitation of offenders is great, companies like Timpsons do great work, St Giles Trust does brilliant work with ex-offenders, it's just that as a woman who often uses private hire cars/taxis, I felt safer thinking that anyone who'd been convicted of a serious offence couldn't be a taxi/private hire driver, and now I find out it's not true and thinking, wtf, women have enough difficulties trying to ensure their safety in their daily lives, I thought that was an area where I didn't have to worry (too much).


----------



## seeformiles (Jan 16, 2022)

AnnO'Neemus said:


> Yeah, can understand the concerns. That's why I was surprised to read of the taxi driver friend who'd been inside above, because I was working on two assumptions ie private hire/ taxi drivers had to be DBS checked (which I further assumed to be enhanced as private hire/ taxi companies often get contracts to do school runs for eg disabled children), and that someone who'd been inside wouldn't pass a DBS check.
> 
> It's kind of been reassuring to me, as a single woman getting in private hire cars and taxis by myself.
> 
> ...



Wise precautions. I was on a jury with a case of a rapist who posed as a minicab driver to trap his victim. I (& others) was left with the nagging sense that it wasn’t the first time he’d done it 🙁


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Jan 16, 2022)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> There's not such a thing as passing or failing a DBS check. It's up to the employer as to whether they will employ you or not depending on what comes back on your record and their policies etc.



yes (other than the few people who are barred from working with children / vulnerable adults) - from memory, we didn't used to have access to 'list 99' which is now rolled in to DBS checking, on the basis that taxi drivers weren't going to be working directly in schools.



AnnO'Neemus said:


> I never get in unmarked vehicles, even I call up and say an unmarked vehicles turned up and control goes 'Sorry, he's got a new car'.



if vehicle has licence plate attached, then it's OK - there isn't a national legal requirement for taxis / private hire to carry any more than that (although local licensing authorities can require additional signage, and often in ways that make it more clear which is a hackney carriage (can be hailed on the street or on taxi rank) or private hire (must be pre-booked.)

if a genuine taxi / private hire company is sending out unlicensed vehicles then a call to the local council is called for...


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 16, 2022)

AnnO'Neemus I only use black cabs for the most part, I would never use an Uber as I far as I am aware they do not have to be licensed in the same way or have passed a DBS check.

There have been too many cases of rapists using minicabs etc as a way of finding women to rape. There was even one guy when I lived in Edinburgh many years ago who used to cruise the streets in a black cab he had obtained, preying on women who thought they were safe. He was caught eventually iirc.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 16, 2022)

> Prince Andrew has been accused of “victim blaming” after new court documents revealed that his lawyers have demanded to see Virginia Giuffre’s mental health records and confidential notes from counselling sessions.











						Prince Andrew accused of ‘victim blaming’ over tactics in sex assault trial
					

Experts have called the move one of ‘the lowest forms of tactics that can be used’




					www.independent.co.uk
				




Too fucking right


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 16, 2022)

two sheds said:


> Prince Andrew accused of ‘victim blaming’ over tactics in sex assault trial
> 
> 
> Experts have called the move one of ‘the lowest forms of tactics that can be used’
> ...




He really is scum.


----------



## Flavour (Jan 16, 2022)

Keep it coming Andy, you alone are doing more damage to an institution we've long wanted destroyed than any of us could have ever hoped to achieve.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 16, 2022)

You'd also have to think this isn't impressing the judge, who didn't seem very impressed by the nitpicking procedural objections.


----------



## Curiouscarl (Jan 16, 2022)

Remember. He is not getting,"done" because he has done something heinous. No No No.

It's because he was caught. That hilarious interview. And the public isn't happy.

I have no doubt his mother has done everything in her power to protect him.

16 November 2019. This is how long him and the other monsters have had to, clean up and protect themselves.

But, I doubt he's sweating about it.


----------



## Curiouscarl (Jan 16, 2022)

Andrew the, full on rapist.

Sorry, I mean, philanthropist.

Allegedly.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 17, 2022)

A380 said:


> Always amazed how so few ‘life time’ revolutionaries on here went to Woodcraft Folk as a kid.
> 
> Span the world with friendship.


never even heard of it till i was in my 30s and met some quakers
im sure the vast majority of people likewise arent aware of it



not-bono-ever said:


> / back to noncing discussion


you get some of that in the scouts ive heard


----------



## two sheds (Jan 17, 2022)

Wasn't sure whether to add this, but if he's going to start with the obtrusive questioning it opens up a line for her lawyers.









						Prince Andrew was visited by Ghislaine so often ex-cop thought they were lovers
					

Ex-bodyguard Paul Page claimed she "kept coming in and out, in and out" - Buckingham Palace were not able to comment




					www.mirror.co.uk
				






> A former royal cop claims he suspected Prince Andrew and Ghislaine Maxwell were lovers from the way she was allegedly 'in and out' of Buckingham Palace.
> 
> Ex-bodyguard Paul Page claimed in an ITV programme — Ghislaine, Prince Andrew and the Paedophile — that Maxwell visited up to four times in one day.
> 
> Mr Page told ITV’s Ranvir Singh: “From the way she was allowed to enter and exit the palace at will, we suspected that she may have had an intimate relationship with Prince Andrew.”


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 17, 2022)

two sheds said:


> Wasn't sure whether to add this, but if he's going to start with the obtrusive questioning it opens up a line for her lawyers.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



There's loads of evidence that those two were thick as thieves and their demeanour very much appeared as if they were lovers. But that ex-filth Paul Page, he's a conman who stole money off friends and colleagues, around £3m in all, fucking over the lives and retirements of many people, he's scum.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 17, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> There's loads of evidence that those two were thick as thieves and their demeanour very much appeared as if they were lovers. But that ex-filth Paul Page, he's a conman who stole money off friends and colleagues, around £3m in all, fucking over the lives and retirements of many people, he's scum.


Also looks unnervingly like Blinky Ben


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 17, 2022)




----------



## Badgers (Jan 18, 2022)

Prince Andrew and Ghislaine Maxwell may have been in relationship, ex-friend claims
					

Prince Andrew and Ghislaine Maxwell could have been in a relationship, a former friend claims




					www.independent.co.uk


----------



## Badgers (Jan 18, 2022)

Prince Andrew and Ghislaine Maxwell may have been in relationship, ex-friend claims
					

Prince Andrew and Ghislaine Maxwell could have been in a relationship, a former friend claims




					www.independent.co.uk


----------



## Badgers (Jan 18, 2022)

Prince Andrew and Ghislaine Maxwell may have been in relationship, ex-friend claims
					

Prince Andrew and Ghislaine Maxwell could have been in a relationship, a former friend claims




					www.independent.co.uk


----------



## Badgers (Jan 18, 2022)

Eh?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 18, 2022)

Badgers said:


> Eh?


I think the boards were wobbling a wee while back


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 18, 2022)

Badgers said:


> Prince Andrew and Ghislaine Maxwell may have been in relationship, ex-friend claims
> 
> 
> Prince Andrew and Ghislaine Maxwell could have been in a relationship, a former friend claims
> ...


I've set that to record.


Badgers said:


> Prince Andrew and Ghislaine Maxwell may have been in relationship, ex-friend claims
> 
> 
> Prince Andrew and Ghislaine Maxwell could have been in a relationship, a former friend claims
> ...


And, that.


Badgers said:


> Prince Andrew and Ghislaine Maxwell may have been in relationship, ex-friend claims
> 
> 
> Prince Andrew and Ghislaine Maxwell could have been in a relationship, a former friend claims
> ...


And, that.


----------



## chandlerp (Jan 18, 2022)

Been a long time since I've seen something in triplicate


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 18, 2022)

DaveCinzano said:


> I think the boards were wobbling a wee while back


It was like the old days.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 18, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> It was like the old days.


Check ya postcounts, Fridgey's been on a rampage

 😱😱😱


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Jan 18, 2022)

chandlerp said:


> Been a long time since I've seen something in triplicate



did you used to be in the civil service?


----------



## elbows (Jan 18, 2022)

> A woman who may have seen Prince Andrew with Virginia Giuffre at a London nightclub 20 years ago is “willing” to provide testimony in Giuffre’s civil lawsuit against the royal, whom she accuses of sexual abuse, the witness’s lawyer said.
> 
> “I am proud to represent Shukri Walker, who has bravely stepped forward as a witness and encourages others who may have information to do so as well,” the lawyer Lisa Bloom said in an email.
> 
> “She is willing to do the deposition Virginia Giuffre’s team is seeking.”











						Witness willing to testify she saw Prince Andrew with a ‘young girl’ at London nightclub
					

Virginia Giuffre’s lawyers seek her statement to counter the royal’s insistence he has never met their client or visited the club




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 18, 2022)

I can’t believe he’s now putting forward an argument of ‘false memories’. It must be pretty galling from her POV that she knows what happened, she knows that he knows what happened but he’s questioning her sanity. 
Transpires that she’ll ruin him in response. 👍


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 18, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> I can’t believe he’s now putting forward an argument of ‘false memories’. It must be pretty galling from her POV that she knows what happened, she knows that he knows what happened but he’s questioning her sanity.
> Transpires that she’ll ruin him in response. 👍


Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned. Andrew has lit the blue touch paper but I don't think he'll like the display


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 18, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned. Andrew has lit the blue touch paper but I don't think he'll like the display



He doesn’t know when to stop digging. Although I guess he has no choice given he’s fixated on saving a forever tarnished reputation yet further burying it with every manoeuvre. 
If he held his hands up and admitted it and apologised but denied knowing she was young or trafficked he might be in a better position than questioning her memories whilst denying he’s in the photograph.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 18, 2022)

Someone's confirmed about him and Maxwell having a relationship: 









						Ghislaine Maxwell lawyers file for retrial over juror’s revelations
					

Lawyers submit documents under seal requesting new trial after juror revealed he was victim of sexual abuse




					www.independent.co.uk
				




now just need confirmation that he threw a wobbly when serfs messed up his teddy bear collection


----------



## Kevbad the Bad (Jan 18, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> I can’t believe he’s now putting forward an argument of ‘false memories’. It must be pretty galling from her POV that she knows what happened, she knows that he knows what happened but he’s questioning her sanity.
> Transpires that she’ll ruin him in response. 👍


I think the idea of 'false memories' has some credibility. I mean, Andrew seems to have plenty of false memories himself. Either that or he's a lying toe rag, which is unthinkable in a member of the royal family.


----------



## Dom Traynor (Jan 18, 2022)

Not that often socialists hang out with people like them.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 18, 2022)

I think they mean Socialite.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 18, 2022)

same thing


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 18, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> I think they mean Socialite.


You've not heard of 'red' victoria hervey, the blue-blood doyenne of dialectical materialism and democratic centralism?


----------



## Raheem (Jan 18, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> I think they mean Socialite.


Or sociopath.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 18, 2022)

Hang in, late to the game here but surely a 41 year old taking a 17 year old to a club is pretty much grooming as well as appallingly slimy behaviour. Can we at least get him on some licenced premises age bylaw just to get the ball rolling  on this turd here in the UK ?


----------



## RileyOBlimey (Jan 18, 2022)




----------



## Ming (Jan 18, 2022)

two sheds said:


> Someone's confirmed about him and Maxwell having a relationship:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So it looks like there really is sexual abuse of minors in elite circles. What i want to know now is are they actually lizards, was it run out of the back room of a pizza restaurant and can someone give Jazz a call?


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 18, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> I can’t believe he’s now putting forward an argument of ‘false memories’. It must be pretty galling from her POV that she knows what happened, she knows that he knows what happened but he’s questioning her sanity.
> Transpires that she’ll ruin him in response. 👍


False memories aren't to do with mental instability, it's literally a memory planted under hypnosis. It doesn't have implications for mental health, as far as I know.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 18, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> You've not heard of 'red' victoria hervey, the blue-blood doyenne of dialectical materialism and democratic centralism?


I did wonder. I thought maybe she sold _The Next Step. _


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 18, 2022)

TopCat said:


> I did wonder. I thought maybe she sold _The Next Step. _


You gots yaself one o' them _logical fallacies_ there, pardner - sure, there were TNSes, and sure there were _solicitations_ fer cash fer said TNSes, but sure as a hog rolls in shit never was a TNS ever sold, nor bought neither


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Jan 19, 2022)

Prince Andrew’s social media accounts deleted as he fights US lawsuit
					

Twitter and YouTube pages no longer accessible, while royal website refers to his role in the past tense




					www.theguardian.com
				




Christ, imagine the sort of people who would follow him on social media.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 19, 2022)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> Prince Andrew’s social media accounts deleted as he fights US lawsuit
> 
> 
> Twitter and YouTube pages no longer accessible, while royal website refers to his role in the past tense
> ...


Sex crime seagulls following in the wake of the trawler of princely privilege


----------



## davesgcr (Jan 19, 2022)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> Prince Andrew’s social media accounts deleted as he fights US lawsuit
> 
> 
> Twitter and YouTube pages no longer accessible, while royal website refers to his role in the past tense
> ...



What the Daily Express would describe as "royal fans" ..........(maybe a group of people who really need to get a life)


----------



## two sheds (Jan 19, 2022)

davesgcr said:


> What the Daily Express would describe as "royal fans" ..........(maybe a group of people who really need to get a life)


Or what the Daily Express would describe as "Daily Express readers" and yes to the rest of the post.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 19, 2022)

DaveCinzano said:


> Sex crime seagulls following in the wake of the trawler of princely privilege


I'd forgotten all about the Sex Crime Seagulls, but that was a great EP.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 20, 2022)

equationgirl said:


> False memories aren't to do with mental instability, it's literally a memory planted under hypnosis. It doesn't have implications for mental health, as far as I know.


Hypnosis is a red herring. False memories can be planted in lots of ways.  The key, however, is the systematic approach in which they are caused to happen. People don’t just get false memories out of some kind of spontaneous self-creation.  The point earlier was the right one, that a therapist can avoid the risk through taking pretty standard safeguards. No reason to think that this therapist has any history at all of implanting false memories.


----------



## UrbaneFox (Jan 20, 2022)

More embarrassment 









						Canada’s Prince Andrew high school announces plan to change name
					

School attempt to distance itself from the growing controversy surrounding the Duke of York




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## dessiato (Jan 20, 2022)

Obviously he’s a twat, I believe he is, on the balance of probabilities, guilty. But shouldn’t he at least have his day in court to defend himself too? Get him in court, then find him guilty. Make him face his accusers.


----------



## Badgers (Jan 20, 2022)

dessiato said:


> Obviously he’s a twat, I believe he is, on the balance of probabilities, guilty. But shouldn’t he at least have his day in court to defend himself too? Get him in court, then find him guilty. Make him face his accusers.


Doesn't feel like accusers. He has admitted it happened, but is using money and entitlement to get out of a rape conviction. Or have I read wrong?


----------



## belboid (Jan 20, 2022)

dessiato said:


> Obviously he’s a twat, I believe he is, on the balance of probabilities, guilty. But shouldn’t he at least have his day in court to defend himself too? Get him in court, then find him guilty. Make him face his accusers.


uhh, that's the plan, yes.


----------



## Kevbad the Bad (Jan 20, 2022)

dessiato said:


> Obviously he’s a twat, I believe he is, on the balance of probabilities, guilty. But shouldn’t he at least have his day in court to defend himself too? Get him in court, then find him guilty. Make him face his accusers.


Let's just find him guilty without a trial. Guilty even of things he hasn't been accused of. Even of crimes which don't exist yet. That would be a larf.


----------



## dessiato (Jan 20, 2022)

belboid said:


> uhh, that's the plan, yes.


But give him a chance to defend himself before we put him before a firing squad.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 20, 2022)

dessiato said:


> But give him a chance to defend himself before we put him before a firing squad.



I believe he had that chance during that classic TV interview, and he totally blow it, and the court of public opinion found him guilty.


----------



## Athos (Jan 20, 2022)

Badgers said:


> Doesn't feel like accusers. He has admitted it happened, but is using money and entitlement to get out of a rape conviction. Or have I read wrong?


No, he hasn't admitted it.  He's strenously denying it.


----------



## Sue (Jan 20, 2022)

dessiato said:


> Obviously he’s a twat, I believe he is, on the balance of probabilities, guilty. But shouldn’t he at least have his day in court to defend himself too? Get him in court, then find him guilty. Make him face his accusers.


He's been trying to avoid going to court.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 20, 2022)

dessiato said:


> But give him a chance to defend himself before we put him before a firing squad.



And, let's not forget, he's doing everything possible to avoid defending himself in court.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 20, 2022)

dessiato said:


> But give him a chance to defend himself before we put him before a firing squad.




Even Thicky McThickface Inverness-Mountbatten-Windsor wouldn’t be so stupid to go up in front of a court and spout his no-sweating, Pizza Express, too fucking honourable, a paedo’s house was a convenient place to stay rubbish. Surely?


----------



## UrbaneFox (Jan 20, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Even Thicky McThickface Inverness-Mountbatten-Windsor wouldn’t be so stupid to go up in front of a court and spout his no-sweating, Pizza Express, too fucking honourable, a paedo’s house was a convenient place to stay rubbish. Surely?


Hollow laugh ...


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Jan 20, 2022)

Athos said:


> He's strenously denying it.



but not strenuously enough to break sweat...


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 20, 2022)

dessiato said:


> But give him a chance to defend himself before we put him before a firing squad.



I think its only right and proper we wait for the Sue Gray report.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 20, 2022)

dessiato said:


> But give him a chance to defend himself before we put him before a firing squad.


Seems he's trying to avoid defending himself for some reason.

Cupid Stunt got there first.


----------



## Sue (Jan 20, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Seems he's trying to avoid defending himself for some reason.
> 
> Cupid Stunt got there first.





Sue said:


> He's been trying to avoid going to court.


Ahem.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Jan 20, 2022)

dessiato said:


> But give him a chance to defend himself before we put him before a firing squad.



Ooh, is there a firing squad involved? Excellent.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 20, 2022)

Sue said:


> Ahem.


Fair dos.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 20, 2022)

dessiato said:


> Obviously he’s a twat, I believe he is, on the balance of probabilities, guilty. But shouldn’t he at least have his day in court to defend himself too? Get him in court, then find him guilty. Make him face his accusers.


Agree with you as a matter of principle, of course, though windsor doesn't want it be a 'testing evidence' type trial. It will be undermine the complainant, in the most gruesome way.  

Fwiw, if it does go to trial, it will be an uphill task for Victoria Giuffre to get a conviction.  Might get proof of his many lies and that he was at Tramp, but the lack of forensics and other supporting evidence makes it a pretty high hurdle.  I do, I might add, believe her.


----------



## existentialist (Jan 20, 2022)

Wilf said:


> Agree with you as a matter of principle, of course, though windsor doesn't want it be a 'testing evidence' type trial. It will be undermine the complainant, in the most gruesome way.
> 
> Fwiw, if it does go to trial, it will be an uphill task for Victoria Giuffre to get a conviction.  Might get proof of his many lies and that he was at Tramp, but the lack of forensics and other supporting evidence makes it a pretty high hurdle.  I do, I might add, believe her.


It's a civil trial, so a conviction is not a potential outcome, though.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 20, 2022)

existentialist said:


> It's a civil trial, so a conviction is not a potential outcome, though.


Yeah, just loose language on my part. 'Judgement' I suppose.


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 20, 2022)

Wilf said:


> Agree with you as a matter of principle, of course, though windsor doesn't want it be a 'testing evidence' type trial. It will be undermine the complainant, in the most gruesome way.
> 
> Fwiw, if it does go to trial, it will be an uphill task for Victoria Giuffre to get a conviction.  Might get proof of his many lies and that he was at Tramp, but the lack of forensics and other supporting evidence makes it a pretty high hurdle.  I do, I might add, believe her.


It's a civil trial, he won't be convicted if she wins. You're convicted by a criminal trial.


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 20, 2022)

Wilf said:


> Yeah, just loose language on my part. 'Judgement' I suppose.


That's not really an excuse, this point has come up frequently.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 21, 2022)

equationgirl said:


> That's not really an excuse, this point has come up frequently.


Well, that's me telt.


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 21, 2022)

Wilf said:


> Well, that's me telt.


Aye 
Mind yerself, laddie!


----------



## UrbaneFox (Jan 21, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> But that ex-filth Paul Page, he's a conman who stole money off friends and colleagues, around £3m in all, fucking over the lives and retirements of many people, he's scum.


OK, but I'm still going to like this bit about the soft toys on his bed.

Lucy Mangan in the Guardian:









						Ghislaine, Prince Andrew and the Paedophile review – a grisly story of sexual abuse and royal palaces
					

How did a newspaper tycoon’s daughter become a paedophile’s accomplice? And how does the royal family fit in? Abuse survivors and others speak out in this disappointingly brief show




					www.theguardian.com
				




"Page also reveals that the prince keeps “50 or 60 soft toys” on his bed and a laminated photo of them at his bedside. If the maids don’t put them back in exactly the order shown, he shouts, screams and becomes “verbally abusive”.

You could argue that this is not relevant to the claims mounting against him as a result of his friendship with Epstein, of course. That’s the friendship (as we are shown again in a clip of the infamous interview with Emily Maitlis, which becomes no less excruciating with the passage of time) Andrew claimed endured after Epstein’s conviction for child abuse because of “my tendency to be too honourable”.

On the other hand, what could be more relevant than such glaring proof of how deep the childishness and sense of entitlement runs in the man?"


----------



## steveseagull (Jan 21, 2022)




----------



## justin credible (Jan 21, 2022)

False memories happen all the time, they do not require the intervention of a therapist or hypnotist although they can and do occur as a result of quack psychotherapy, often including hypnotic elements, such as EMDR.

I know a fair amount about this having been on the receiving end of psychogtherapeutic abuse from a notorious psychologist who specialises in recovering memories of satanic ritual abuse, although she concealed her beliefs and association from me during the course of therapy.  I eventually left when her beliefs became obvious, although she still denied them.  Later on, 2 years exactly after I left therapy, her associations wtih people like Valerie Sinason became apparent online.  I now understand that this is to do with the legal window for suing a therapist for malpractice, it has to be within 2 years of last contact.  

I have experienced many traumatic abuses in my life but I am very clear that I have never been involved in a satanic cult, contrary to the insistence of the psychologist whose opinion was that the fact that I did not recall such abuse was because it was so traumatic that I had repressed the memories.  The fact that I had no memories of being abused by a satanic cult was incontrovertible proof that it must have happened in her eyes at least.  

This documentary has a good overview of the science of false memories 


My experience of abusive psychotherapy had many similarities to that of this young woman.  I have PTSD and am very distresed about what happend to me, however I do not have the challenges in terms of serious ongoing mental illness that this young woman has.  Given the challenges she is facing I am extremely impressed with her very thoughtful and thorough video. 



As for Prince Andrew I am definitely not a fan (understatement) and I am disgusted by his friendship with Epstein as well as his activities as UK Trade Ambassador.  I am not sure what to make of his claims about false memories until I know more about Ms Giuffre's therapist.  I know of many therapists who practice dangerous recovered memory therapies, here in the UK and all over the world.  

Having said that, a therapist is not neccessary for false memories to occur.  The tendency for groups of people to confirm and validate each others' false beliefs (as demonstrated by the Asch conformity experiments) demonstrates how social contagion can generate collective false beliefs including memories.  






equationgirl said:


> False memories aren't to do with mental instability, it's literally a memory planted under hypnosis. It doesn't have implications for mental health, as far as I know.


----------



## Badgers (Jan 21, 2022)

Puddy_Tat said:


> but not strenuously enough to break sweat...


This  ^

I thought intercourse was confirmed as happening. Where, and more importantly when it happened is the issue?


----------



## justin credible (Jan 21, 2022)

Valerie Sinason has featured extensively in the excellent Private Eye magazine Satanic Panic section.  

She isn't happy about the exposure 





adding in case the editor gets worried about me naming a notorious false memory therapist.  Hopefully the exposure in the Eye is good enough, she has also been exposed in the Observer, the Independent and various other media


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 21, 2022)

Badgers said:


> This  ^
> 
> I thought intercourse was confirmed as happening. Where, and more importantly when it happened is the issue?




He confirmed it happened with Fergie, he denies every meeting Virginia Giufree, née Roberts.

And if a man as honourable as Andrew says so, who are we to question his word?


----------



## xenon (Jan 21, 2022)

justin credible said:


> Valerie Sinason has featured extensively in the excellent Private Eye magazine Satanic Panic section.
> 
> She isn't happy about the exposure
> 
> ...




Interesting though this is, not being glib. Here the raising of false memories by Andrew's defence team, with respect to Giuffre is transparrently synicle and desperate.   Not worth giving any serious discussion.

Andrew's memory seems pretty faulty, based on the evidence so far. I'm sure that will come up in court though...


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 21, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> He confirmed it happened with Fergie, he denies every meeting Virginia Giufree, née Roberts.
> 
> And if a man as honourable as Andrew says so, who are we to question his word?
> 
> ...


I come not to praise Andrew but to bury him


----------



## justin credible (Jan 21, 2022)

xenon said:


> Interesting though this is, not being glib. Here the raising of false memories by Andrew's defence team, with respect to Giuffre is transparrently synicle and desperate.   Not worth giving any serious discussion.
> 
> Andrew's memory seems pretty faulty, based on the evidence so far. I'm sure that will come up in court though...



It may indeed be cynical.  I have bitter personal experience of being accused of having false memories of sexual abuse by a family member who I can prove sexually abused me.   Perpetrators will try to use false memories as a defence obviously.   Also perpetrators can have false memories just as any other person can.  I believe that my elderly relative, who has an age related cognitive disability, genuinely believes that he never abused me.  

I would be fascinated to know more about Giuffre's psychologist, I dug around a bit and found her but all of her public profiles contain no information about her training, qualifications etc. which is interesting in itself.  

These issues are immensely complex simply because people who have genuinely been sexually abused can end up in therapy with a quack (as happend to me).  So even if Giuffre's psychologist is a quack (and there are plenty of them in Australia) it does not mean that she was not abused.  

I hope that makes sense.  Given the plethora of quacks out there and the huge numbers of innocent people who end up falsely accused, and sometimes convicted, on the basis of false memory therapy I think it is important to try to keep a rational / skeptical perspective whoever it is who is accused.  

I also believe that traumatised people who have endured abuse deserve proper quality care and support and unfortunately is is not available, at least not in my experience.


----------



## andysays (Jan 21, 2022)

justin credible said:


> False memories happen all the time, they do not require the intervention of a therapist or hypnotist although they can and do occur as a result of quack psychotherapy, often including hypnotic elements, such as EMDR.
> 
> I know a fair amount about this having been on the receiving end of psychogtherapeutic abuse from a notorious psychologist who specialises in recovering memories of satanic ritual abuse, although she concealed her beliefs and association from me during the course of therapy.  I eventually left when her beliefs became obvious, although she still denied them.  Later on, 2 years exactly after I left therapy, her associations wtih people like Valerie Sinason became apparent online.  I now understand that this is to do with the legal window for suing a therapist for malpractice, it has to be within 2 years of last contact.
> 
> ...




Sorry to read about your experiences.

It's worth everyone bearing in mind that False Memory Syndrome is a complex issue which we should probably refrain from making generalised and possibly over simplified comments about.

In the context of this thread, however, it appears to me that the suggestion from Andrew's lawyers that Virginia Giuffre's accusations can be explained away by FMS is just one more attempt to muddy the waters by smearing his victim.

I don't think it's helpful or necessary to delve too much into the complex subject of FMS here.


----------



## justin credible (Jan 21, 2022)

andysays said:


> Sorry to read about your experiences.
> 
> It's worth everyone bearing in mind that False Memory Syndrome is a complex issue which we should probably refrain from making generalised and possibly over simplified comments about.
> 
> ...



I don't think it is helpful to refer to "False Memory Syndrome", largely due to the "syndrome" element which suggests that it is a condition or mental illness rather than an iatrogenic sequeale of psychotherapeutic abuse and, to a lesser extent, a naturally occuring phemomena that happens to all of us on a daily basis.

I was not aware that I have oversimplified anything.  I have studied the academic literature around false memories for decades.  I have a professional qualification in mental health and have many years of personal experiences of these issues.  I have provided a link to a very good documentary exploring memory science in case anyone is interested. 

As for smearing his victim, as you must be aware Epstein ran a sex trafficking pyramid scheme in which many women acted as both victims and perpetrators.  It was very similar as to what happened in the NXIVM cult.  This is an immensely complex situation in which any allegation by anyone, especailly if that person recruited others to the network (as Giuffre did), need to be examined in a skeptical and rational manner. 

I am not attempting to smear anyone, simply to highlight some of the issues. 

For me, as someone who has been profoundly harmed by false memory therapy, this case provides an opportunity to explore those issues.  When I have tried to have rational discussions about the science of memory I have been gaslighted on many occasions by others claiming that I am "smearing victims".

If you genuinely believe that anyone who makes an allegation of anything, including non-recent sexual abuse, should always be believed and that criminal trials are not neccessary then you could argue that I am "smearing victims". 

I do not believe that we should always believe people make accusations against others.  I do believe that people alleging recent or non-recent sexual crimes should be treated fairly and sensitively and not be either believed or disblieved.  I will always, always support due process regardless of who is accusing and who is accused.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 21, 2022)

justin credible said:


> I do not believe that we should always believe people make accusations against others.  I do believe that people alleging recent or non-recent sexual crimes should be treated fairly and sensitively and not be either believed or disblieved.  I will always, always support due process regardless of who is accusing and who is accused.


i suppose you believe that all allegations of such incidents should be investigated, which normally precedes the due process element


----------



## justin credible (Jan 21, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> but i suppose you believe that all allegations of such incidents should be investigated


of course I do. and if there is sufficient evidence tried in a court of law


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 21, 2022)

justin credible said:


> of course I do.  In a court of law


oh dear. i thought you might believe that things should be investigated before they reached a court of law.


----------



## justin credible (Jan 21, 2022)

edited immediately I posted but was not quick enough oh well  - running late and posting in haste that'll teach me


----------



## andysays (Jan 21, 2022)

justin credible said:


> I don't think it is helpful to refer to "False Memory Syndrome", largely due to the "syndrome" element which suggests that it is a condition or mental illness rather than an iatrogenic sequeale of psychotherapeutic abuse and, to a lesser extent, a naturally occuring phemomena that happens to all of us on a daily basis.
> 
> I was not aware that I have oversimplified anything.  I have studied the academic literature around false memories for decades.  I have a professional qualification in mental health and have many years of personal experiences of these issues.  I have provided a link to a very good documentary exploring memory science in case anyone is interested.
> 
> ...


OK, I'm happy to agree that referring to FMS may not be the best term to use and apologise for my use of it.

And, because my previous post obviously wasn't clear, I wasn't suggesting that you yourself were over-simplifying. If that was directed at anyone, it was referring to others who have made what appear to me to simplistic comments before the one from you that I actually quoted.

Nor was I suggesting that you were smearing anyone - that point was aimed firmly at Andrew and his lawyers.

My overall point was to suggest (to everyone, not just to you) that the complex issue of false memories isn't one which we should allow this thread to get diverted on to, as it is simply yet another diversionary tactic employed by Andrew and his lawyers.

But in saying that, I also don't want to dismiss your experiences, though I suggest that there might be a better thread than this to discuss them on.


----------



## andysays (Jan 21, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> oh dear. i thought you might believe that things should be investigated before they reached a court of law.


I think you should cut this poster a bit of slack on this subject. 

It's obviously something they have some personal experience of, and I don't think it's helpful to pick holes in what they're saying in the way you sometimes have a tendency to do.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 21, 2022)

andysays said:


> I think you should cut this poster a bit of slack on this subject.
> 
> It's obviously something they have some personal experience of, and I don't think it's helpful to pick holes in what they're saying in the way you sometimes have a tendency to do.


i have cut them some slack. i was asking about what was to me an obvious missing element from their post, namely that allegations they should be investigated. that's been sorted.


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 21, 2022)

Sorry that this happened to you justin credible I hope you managed to find a decent therapist who wasn't a quack to help you.


----------



## nogojones (Jan 21, 2022)

dessiato said:


> Obviously he’s a twat, I believe he is, on the balance of probabilities, guilty. But shouldn’t he at least have his day in court to defend himself too? Get him in court, then find him guilty. Make him face his accusers.


Booo. I say we burn him!


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 21, 2022)

dessiato said:


> Obviously he’s a twat, I believe he is, on the balance of probabilities, guilty. But shouldn’t he at least have his day in court to defend himself too? Get him in court, then find him guilty. Make him face his accusers.


That could all happen and should but he will have a veritable fuckton of legal folk pouring through the law books looking for ways to get him off, because he can afford it. So yeah he can have his day in court but don't say that as if HIS DAY IN COURT will force him onto a level playing field with his accusers, it fucking won't.


----------



## 1927 (Jan 21, 2022)

Andy's weird teddy bear obsession!!
Family, Parenting, Pet and Lifestyle Tips That Bring Us Closer Together | LittleThings.com


----------



## Raheem (Jan 21, 2022)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> That could all happen and should but he will have a veritable fuckton of legal folk pouring through the law books looking for ways to get him off, because he can afford it. So yeah he can have his day in court but don't say that as if HIS DAY IN COURT will force him onto a level playing field with his accusers, it fucking won't.


This is true, but the positive side is that it turns out there actually is a playing field, at least.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 21, 2022)

Raheem said:


> This is true, but the positive side is that it turns out there actually is a playing field, at least.


?!


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 21, 2022)

,


----------



## TopCat (Jan 21, 2022)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Note for the confused: if you click on this it presents an article about Andrew and his teddies


I really appreciate the heads up.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 21, 2022)

,


----------



## TopCat (Jan 21, 2022)

I mean so i did not look at it. Too much.


----------



## Chilli.s (Jan 22, 2022)

Not at all weird


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 22, 2022)

I’ll tell you where he fucking wants his toys.


----------



## Chilli.s (Jan 22, 2022)

As kindling for the pyre just after he's tied to the steak?


----------



## Serge Forward (Jan 22, 2022)

But how would we like the steak?


----------



## Chilli.s (Jan 22, 2022)

Sorry... stake, although steak would possibly make it more of a spectacle.

(dyslexic)


----------



## manji (Jan 22, 2022)

Belfast councillors vote to stop Union flag flying on Andrew’s birthday abandoned by Irish Loyalists.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 22, 2022)

manji said:


> Belfast councillors vote to stop Union flag flying on Andrew’s birthday abandoned by Irish Loyalists.


How fucked are you, as an aristocratic nonce - son of the Queen no less - for Ulster's brightest and best to ditch you? That takes real finesse.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 22, 2022)

DUP voted to keep it flying for him  

... ah yes


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 22, 2022)

Chilli.s said:


> Sorry... stake, although steak would possibly make it more of a spectacle.
> 
> (dyslexic)


Well-done either way


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 22, 2022)

I guess we do at last have an answer to the perennial question posed by unionists, but who knew it would be _principes stultus_?


----------



## tim (Jan 22, 2022)

Chilli.s said:


> Not at all weird
> 
> View attachment 306961


Probably not that weird if you have OCD.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 22, 2022)

The thing more than anything that tells you that the whole idea of false memories in this case is a desperate and cynical diversionary defence strategy is that there has been no suggestion at any point from VG that her memories have been anything but continuously present. There is no rupture or “recovery” or period of forgetting. She has claimed that she had  an experience that has affected her every day since it happened. That is absolutely not the pattern associated with implanted memories.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 22, 2022)

Is that gilded heap actually his bed?


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 22, 2022)

I thought he had thirty teddies so clearly not.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 22, 2022)

I keep laughing at the fact that the teddy bear freak is the queen's favourite son.


----------



## clicker (Jan 22, 2022)

Why has he got Paul Daniel's wig on his bed?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 22, 2022)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I keep laughing at the fact that the teddy bear freak is the queen's favourite son.



It's what you might call a pretty shallow field.

Imagine being Charles though. Being less popular with your own mother than the halfwit nonce and national pariah.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 22, 2022)

You remember that Diana princess of hearts FB site I mentioned a while ago ? They have now invaded the long standing  Prince  Andrew FB fan page en masse and trashed it


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 22, 2022)

Cross thread beef Meat Loaf tried to 'push Prince Andrew into moat' at Royal charity event


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 22, 2022)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Cross thread beef Meat Loaf tried to 'push Prince Andrew into moat' at Royal charity event



_Beef? _Too soon mate, too soon


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 22, 2022)

SpookyFrank said:


> _Beef? _Too soon mate, too soon


oooooops


----------



## Dom Traynor (Jan 22, 2022)

Anti vaca?


----------



## mango5 (Jan 26, 2022)

Cripes! Mummy will be fuming.


----------



## 1927 (Jan 26, 2022)

Will he have to appear? seems a bit rich to be demanding a jury trial and then refuse to actually attend court!


----------



## Duncan2 (Jan 26, 2022)

Does this indicate that he means to take the stand in his own defence


----------



## brogdale (Jan 26, 2022)

mango5 said:


> Cripes! Mummy will be fuming.



What's the jury bit all about?


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 26, 2022)

brogdale said:


> What's the jury bit all about?


The jury will decide whether he's guilty of the claims made by Guiffre, or not, rather than a bench trial where the judge decides the outcome.

Guilty isn't quite the right word but I can't think of the right one.


----------



## Athos (Jan 26, 2022)

Full doc setting out his defences attached, with highlights below.  Allthe defences are procedural (which isn't to say they won't succed), except the biggie - no.5 - consent.

FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction)
1. Giuffre’s Complaint should be dismissed because this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over the action, due to Giuffre’s improper assertion of diversity jurisdiction notwithstanding that she is a permanent resident of Australia and not a domiciliary of Colorado.

SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Waiver and Release)
2. Giuffre, through her own actions, inactions, and other conduct – including, without limitation, entering into the 2009 Release Agreement with Epstein containing a broad third-party release of her claims against Prince Andrew and others – waived the claims now asserted in the Complain

THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Laches)
3. Giuffre is barred, in whole or in part, from obtaining the requested relief based on the doctrine of lache.

FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Damages Contributed to by Other)
4. Assuming, without admitting, that Giuffre has suffered any injury or damage, Giuffre and/or others, who are not Prince Andrew, contributed in whole or in part to the alleged damag

FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Consent)
5. Assuming, without admitting, that Giuffre has suffered any injury or damage alleged in the Complaint, Giuffre’s claims are barred by the doctrine of consent.

SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Unclean Hands)
6. Giuffre’s alleged causes of action are barred in whole or in part by her own wrongful conduct and the doctrine of unclean hand.

SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Estoppel)
7. As a result of Giuffre’s knowledge, conduct, words and/or actions, Giuffre’s claims are barred, in whole or in part, by the doctrine of estoppe.

EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Statute of Limitations)
8. Giuffre’s claims are barred in whole or in part by the applicable statute(s) of limitations.

NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Speculative Damage)
9. Giuffre cannot recover the damages alleged in the Complaint because such damages, if any, are too speculative to be recoverable at law.

TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(No Right to Exemplary or Punitive Damages)
10. Giuffre’s prayer for exemplary or punitive damages is barred because the Complaint fails to allege facts sufficient to entitle Giuffre to recover exemplary or punitive damages from Prince Andrew. Moreover, any award of punitive damages is unconstitutional if it is excessive under the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendmen.

ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Failure to State a Claim)
11. Giuffre’s causes of action fail to state facts sufficient to constitute viable causes of action against Prince Andrew.


----------



## 1927 (Jan 26, 2022)

Hold on! SO hes now claiming she consented, so is that an admission that he can remember meeting her and did have sex with her? Moreover, victiim blaming a child is not exactly a good look.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 26, 2022)

Duncan2 said:


> Does this indicate that he means to take the stand in his own defence


I genuinely, sincerely, and ardently hope so. 

And this being the US, hopefully it will be live.


----------



## 1927 (Jan 26, 2022)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I genuinely, sincerely, and ardently hope so.
> 
> And this being the US, hopefully it will be live.


He usually does so well when questioned tho! The truth about the sweating defence will be well and truly proved or not!


----------



## Flavour (Jan 26, 2022)

1927 said:


> Hold on! SO hes now claiming she consented, so is that an admission that he can remember meeting her and did have sex with her? Moreover, victiim blaming a child is not exactly a good look.


As you may remember from previous episodes involving Prince Andrew, he does not much care for optics


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 26, 2022)

We need to remember that he is utterly shameless. Wouldn't be surprised if he insisted on a jury trial then didn't turn up - it's a civil court, he doesn't have to. A new condition that means his heart explodes if he flies higher than 1,000 metres, perhaps. Walking medical miracle that he is.


----------



## Athos (Jan 26, 2022)

I suspect it'll settle, but, if it doesn't and if he's not succesful in getting it thrown out before a trial, I'm sure he'll be pushing hard to appear by video link.


----------



## 1927 (Jan 26, 2022)

Sure ts very high risk demanding a jury trail, if he doesnt get it, hes just pissed off the judge big time, and wont get any favours. Isnt it also a bit dangerous to keep banging on about whether the case should even proceed and claiming that hes covered by the epstein agreement, the judge has already rued on that so another opportunity to piss off judge!


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 26, 2022)

Athos said:


> I suspect it'll settle, but, if it doesn't and if he's not succesful in getting it thrown out before a trial, I'm sure he'll be pushing hard to appear by video link.


Legal question. If I'm sued in a US civil court and totally ignore it, and they rule against me with some sum of money owed, if I continue to totally ignore it, is there anything they can do to me as long as I remember never to set foot in the US?


----------



## Athos (Jan 26, 2022)

1927 said:


> Sure ts very high risk demanding a jury trail, if he doesnt get it, hes just pissed off the judge big time, and wont get any favours. Isnt it also a bit dangerous to keep banging on about whether the case should even proceed and claiming that hes covered by the epstein agreement, the judge has already rued on that so another opportunity to piss off judge!


He's got a better chance of a jury finding in his favour than a judge; that's why he's insisting on it.

He wil get it; he's entitled to it.

It's usual to plead mutually exclusive defences in the alternative; increases his chance of geting home on something.

The judge hasn't ruled on the issue of the agreement as such; he merely decided that there wasn't grounds to strike the claim out based upon it; it's still open to be argued at trial.


----------



## Athos (Jan 26, 2022)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Legal question. If I'm sued in a US civil court and totally ignore it, and they rule against me with some sum of money owed, if I continue to totally ignore it, is there anything they can do to me as long as I remember never to set foot in the US?


Yes, subject to satisfaction of six criteria, US judgements can be enforced in the UK as debts.  Notably, not any part of the dameages that are punitive, though.


----------



## 1927 (Jan 26, 2022)

Athos said:


> He's got a better chance of a jury finding in his favour than a judge; that's why he's insisting on it.
> 
> He wil get it; he's entitled to it.
> 
> ...


Thanks for clarifying, still think its taking the piss to demand a jury trial and then not attend in person!


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 26, 2022)

1927 said:


> Thanks for clarifying, still think its taking the piss to demand a jury trial and then not attend in person!


He's a member of the British royal family. Taking the piss has been his lifelong occupation.


----------



## Athos (Jan 26, 2022)

1927 said:


> Thanks for clarifying, still think its taking the piss to demand a jury trial and then not attend in person!



Yeah, surprising for such a stand-up kinda guy.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 26, 2022)

Will the proceedings be on TV? The Maxwell and Weinstein ones weren’t but they were federal affairs. I will go to church every Sunday for a year if we get to watch Andy giving evidence to a court.


----------



## Chilli.s (Jan 26, 2022)

Holy.Fuckin.Shit


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 26, 2022)

mango5 said:


> Cripes! Mummy will be fuming.



I’m assuming his lawyers are not fighting this case on a no win no fee basis


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 26, 2022)

Someone's settled his interim account then.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 26, 2022)

On a completely unrelated matter not involving His Royal Lowliness in the slightest  but possibly filling a juror's mind with imaginings, this just goes to show how the worst of the very rich can behave.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 26, 2022)

Athos said:


> FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
> (Consent)
> 5. Assuming, without admitting, that Giuffre has suffered any injury or damage alleged in the Complaint, Giuffre’s claims are barred by the doctrine of consent.


What am I missing? Why is this not bigger news?


----------



## two sheds (Jan 26, 2022)

'Unclean hands' is a nasty part of the defence, too.


----------



## Athos (Jan 26, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> What am I missing? Why is this not bigger news?


It might be tomorrow.  But it's notable that he still denies any sexual activity with her:

"44. Prince Andrew denies the allegations contained in paragraph forty-four of the Complaint and denies that he ever engaged in sexual acts with Giuffre."


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 26, 2022)

Athos said:


> It might be tomorrow.  But it's notable that he denies any sexual activity with her:
> 
> "44. Prince Andrew denies the allegations contained in paragraph forty-four of the Complaint and denies that he ever engaged in sexual acts with Giuffre."


So it’s “we didn’t have sex but if we did it would have been consensual”?  I’m not following the legalese here.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 26, 2022)

in british law you'd say 'further and in the alternative' I think

I'm not sure how consensual works if she was underage in the state it happened though.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 26, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> So it’s “we didn’t have sex but if we did it would have been consensual”?  I’m not following the legalese here.


_I don't remember having sex with her, but if I did, then it will have been consensual because I don't rape people._

That would be Andrew-logic. Maybe he's writing his own defence.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 26, 2022)

two sheds said:


> in british law you'd say 'further and in the alternative' I think
> 
> I'm not sure how consensual works if she was underage in the state it happened though.


Because it's not a criminal trial, the criminal concept of the age of consent does not necessarily apply (this is a guess, and obviously it would not look great to a jury).


----------



## Athos (Jan 26, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> So it’s “we didn’t have sex but if we did it would have been consensual”?  I’m not following the legalese here.


Yes, that's pretty much it.  Continue to deny any sex, but keep a defence consent open, just in case she's somehow able to prove sex happened.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 26, 2022)

Asked for comment on Andrew’s filing, Giuffre’s lawyers said in a statement: “Prince Andrew’s Answer continues his approach of denying any knowledge or information concerning the claims against him, and purporting to blame the victim of the abuse for somehow bringing it on herself.

“We look forward to confronting Prince Andrew with his denials and attempts to blame Ms Giuffre for her own abuse at his deposition and at trial,” their statement also said.





I’m sure there’s a perfectly innocent explanation for all of this and that a prince of the realm will be honourable enough to clear this whole thing up and we can all move on.


Popcorn anyone?


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 26, 2022)

Flavour said:


> As you may remember from previous episodes involving Prince Andrew, he does not much care for optics


Optics are for the commoners.


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 26, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Asked for comment on Andrew’s filing, Giuffre’s lawyers said in a statement: “Prince Andrew’s Answer continues his approach of denying any knowledge or information concerning the claims against him, and purporting to blame the victim of the abuse for somehow bringing it on herself.
> 
> “We look forward to confronting Prince Andrew with his denials and attempts to blame Ms Giuffre for her own abuse at his deposition and at trial,” their statement also said.
> 
> ...


With this thread, the Brewdog thread and the Bojo thread, we're going to need a LOT of popcorn.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 26, 2022)

Athos said:


> Yes, that's pretty much it.  Continue to deny any sex, but keep a defence consent open, just in case she's somehow able to prove sex happened.


Pretty stupid to demand a jury, then, because that’s not a nuance I can see laypeople going for.


----------



## Athos (Jan 26, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> Pretty stupid to demand a jury, then, because that’s not a nuance I can see laypeople going for.


No, I'd go jury all day long.  Not that I'd ever be in his shoes!


----------



## mx wcfc (Jan 26, 2022)

Athos said:


> Yes, that's pretty much it.  Continue to deny any sex, but keep a defence consent open, just in case she's somehow able to prove sex happened.


Wouldn't it be wonderful if she had a sperm stain that could be analysed for DNA?


----------



## brogdale (Jan 26, 2022)

equationgirl said:


> The jury will decide whether he's guilty of the claims made by Guiffre, or not, rather than a bench trial where the judge decides the outcome.
> 
> Guilty isn't quite the right word but I can't think of the right one.


Yep, thanks...probably should have said...why has his team chosen that option; what's the perceived advantage to Windsor of having a jury?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 26, 2022)

brogdale said:


> Yep, thanks...probably should have said...why has his team chosen that option; what's the perceived advantage to Windsor of having a jury?


Because he's betting they won't find 12 royal nonces in america


----------



## Raheem (Jan 26, 2022)

brogdale said:


> Yep, thanks...probably should have said...why has his team chosen that option; what's the perceived advantage to Windsor of having a jury?


Think it is (1) easier to get a jury to take account of things the law says they shouldn't and (2) it makes the process more costly, thereby putting pressure on the plaintiff to settle.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 26, 2022)

Raheem said:


> Think it is (1) easier to get a jury to take account of things the law says they shouldn't and (2) it makes the process more costly, thereby putting pressure on the plaintiff to settle.


Thanks.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 26, 2022)

equationgirl said:


> Optics are for the commoners.


Optics are only for opticians and pubs


----------



## Athos (Jan 26, 2022)

It's easier to play on jurors' emotions by smearing a victim's character than it is with a judge.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 26, 2022)

Newsnight exploring the jury decision and US lawyer says that the plaintiff had already demanded jury trial so Windsor was only agreeing to what she would have been granted anyway.


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 27, 2022)

brogdale said:


> Yep, thanks...probably should have said...why has his team chosen that option; what's the perceived advantage to Windsor of having a jury?


My guess would be that he thinks he can persuade everyday Americans that as he is a Prince, a member of the British royal family, he couldn't possibly have done of the things he has been accused of. I think he thinks they're stupid and will believe his version of events without question.

I also think he's in for a bit of a surprise.


----------



## belboid (Jan 27, 2022)

Athos said:


> It's easier to play on jurors' emotions by smearing a victim's character than it is with a judge.


Yeah, but at the same time it’s easy to play on a jurors emotion by ‘smearing’ the accused.  A jury is more likely to convict on balance of probabilities rather than a judge who would demand ‘proof’


----------



## seeformiles (Jan 27, 2022)

Now he denies being a close friend of Maxwell. His defence gets ever stupider 









						Prince Andrew denies close friendship with Ghislaine Maxwell in US court files
					

In US court files, the prince, who denies assault claims, also asks for a jury trial in his accuser's lawsuit.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## rubbershoes (Jan 27, 2022)

Orang Utan said:


> I’m assuming his lawyers are not fighting this case on a no win no fee basis



That only really applies to people who are bringing claims. Their lawyers get paid a share of the winnings.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jan 27, 2022)

“On the matter of a photograph of the prince with his arm around Ms Giuffre, with Maxwell in the background, his lawyers say they do not have enough information to admit or deny its existence”

If only there was a widely distributed and now famous photograph to prove the existence of the photograph…


----------



## 1927 (Jan 27, 2022)

seeformiles said:


> Now he denies being a close friend of Maxwell. His defence gets ever stupider
> 
> 
> 
> ...


This is a very dodgy development. In the infamous interview didn't he state that he wasn’t a close friend of Epstein, but his friendship was with Maxwell? If he wasn’t a close friend of Maxwell then the inference has to be that he was closer to Epstein! Surely you don’t invite people to the palace and Sandringham unless you are close friends with at least one of them! 

Keep digging Andy!


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 27, 2022)

1927 said:


> This is a very dodgy development. In the infamous interview didn't he state that he wasn’t a close friend of Epstein, but his friendship was with Maxwell? If he wasn’t a close friend of Maxwell then the inference has to be that he was closer to Epstein! Surely you don’t invite people to the palace and Sandringham unless you are close friends with at least one of them!
> 
> Keep digging Andy!




He said Epstein was Maxwell’s plus one, cos he wouldn’t be friends with a sex criminal. Didn’t age well…


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 27, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> He said Epstein was Maxwell’s plus one, cos he wouldn’t be friends with a sex criminal. Didn’t age well…


It's an utter mystery how Maxwell and Epstein found themselves guests at Sandringham, or how Windsor found himself in Epstein's house or on his island. Or why he had to do the honourable thing and travel across the Atlantic to tell Epstein he could no longer be friends. The world is a baffling place.


----------



## Athos (Jan 27, 2022)

belboid said:


> Yeah, but at the same time it’s easy to play on a jurors emotion by ‘smearing’ the accused.  A jury is more likely to convict on balance of probabilities rather than a judge who would demand ‘proof’


In principle, maybe. But I'm not sure if pans out that way. Clearly, Andrew's lawyers think a jury is his best chance.


----------



## MickiQ (Jan 27, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Will the proceedings be on TV? The Maxwell and Weinstein ones weren’t but they were federal affairs. I will go to church every Sunday for a year if we get to watch Andy giving evidence to a court.


I'll join you, I shall ask Mrs Q's god bothering aunt to have a word with her mate.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 27, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> It's an utter mystery how Maxwell and Epstein found themselves guests at Sandringham, Windsor Castle, Buckingham Palace, Balmoral, his daughter Beatrice's 18th birthday party...


----------



## dessiato (Jan 27, 2022)

Mrs D to HWCS, "mate, just shut the fuck up, you're digging a big hole here." I tend to agree.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2022)

dessiato said:


> Mrs D to HWCS, "mate, just shut the fuck up, you're digging a big hole here." I tend to agree.


----------



## Sue (Jan 27, 2022)

The Today programme had a former DA on this morning explaining the legal significance (or not) of the responses on his form. From about 08:20.


----------



## steveo87 (Jan 27, 2022)

I keep on hearing 'trail by....' on the radio. 
Massive disappointment that its not combat to be honest.

Then we'd see him sweat...not not.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 27, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> It's an utter mystery how Maxwell and Epstein found themselves guests at Sandringham,



Balmoral as well.

Maybe Maxwell and Epstein had a habit of sneaking away from official tours?


----------



## T & P (Jan 27, 2022)

Clearly they liked gatecrashing Royal residences and doing danger shags there, and poor Andrew and his family were completely unaware of their presence. There, he's innocent and telling the truth after all


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2022)

T & P said:


> Clearly they liked gatecrashing Royal residences and doing danger shags there, and poor Andrew and his family were completely unaware of their presence. There, he's innocent and telling the truth after all


they followed aaron barschak in


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 27, 2022)

Athos said:


> In principle, maybe. But I'm not sure if pans out that way. Clearly, Andrew's lawyers think a jury is his best chance.


Or least worst. I don't think it's a stellar plan.


----------



## tim (Jan 27, 2022)

1927 said:


> This is a very dodgy development. In the infamous interview didn't he state that he wasn’t a close friend of Epstein, but his friendship was with Maxwell? If he wasn’t a close friend of Maxwell then the inference has to be that he was closer to Epstein! Surely you don’t invite people to the palace and Sandringham unless you are close friends with at least one of them!
> 
> Keep digging Andy!



“On the matter of a interview of the prince with Emily Maitliss with a Caneletto in the background, his lawyers say they do not have enough information to admit or deny its existence"


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2022)

equationgirl said:


> Or least worst. I don't think it's a stellar plan.


no indeed, conceived in the course of a drinking spree it is of course a stella plan


----------



## two sheds (Jan 27, 2022)

tim said:


> “On the matter of a interview of the prince with Emily Maitliss with a Caneletto in the background, his lawyers say they do not have enough information to admit or deny its existence"


It clearly wasn't him in that interview because the person in it was obviously sweating ....


----------



## Funky_monks (Jan 27, 2022)

Duncan2 said:


> Does this indicate that he means to take the stand in his own defence


Please let that happen 🙏


----------



## UrbaneFox (Jan 27, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> It's an utter mystery how Maxwell and Epstein found themselves guests at Sandringham, or how Windsor found himself in Epstein's house or on his island. Or why he had to do the honourable thing and travel across the Atlantic to tell Epstein he could no longer be friends. The world is a baffling place.


I suspect that they were the only friends he had. Scraping the barrel.


----------



## justin credible (Jan 27, 2022)

equationgirl said:


> Sorry that this happened to you justin credible I hope you managed to find a decent therapist who wasn't a quack to help you.


Thank you for your kind thoughts.  Unfortunately I have been completely without support.  When I have attempted to describe what happened to me and to ask for NHS therapy with a therapist who does not believe in satanic ritual abuse (SRA) I have encountered only further gaslighting from mental health professionals who share the delusion that satanic cults are everywhere, one of whom opined that I was making serious accusations against her friends and colleagues, one of whom told me that he worked with many survivors of SRA and that he did not believe in false memories.  

On other occasions, have had my concerns twisted into “is preoccupied with paranoid delusions that mental health services have been taken over by professionals believing in satanic ritual abuse” and, the shit cherry on the cake, “is preoccupied with anxieties about satanic cults”.   

I have various audio recordings, including one of a psychiatrist asking in a syrupy, sing song voice “but why do you think a psychologist would do this to you?  Why do you believe that your psychologist would believe in such a strange thing?  If we can find the answer to this then we can find the key to why you are so anxious”.  That particular psychiatrist was visiting me with a view to sectioning me.  Thankfully I was not sectioned but, given what happened to Carol Felstead I was understandably terrified.  

Obviously this had had a significant toll on my mental health.  There have been times when I have questioned my own sanity - something a genuinely deluded / psychotic person never does.

For any readers doubting that this really happened to me, and I can understand why people might doubt it, I would draw their attention to the following video by Carol Felstead’s bother Kevin Felstead on his families experience of navigating the system after Carol’s mysterious and unexplained death while in the care of a cabal of SRA obsessed quacks, many of whom still work in the NHS and weild considerable power over vulnerable patients. 


We live in dangerous times when anyone can be falsely accused of horrific sexual offences against children and all posters here should be concerned about this as it could be you next.


----------



## justin credible (Jan 27, 2022)

andysays said:


> OK, I'm happy to agree that referring to FMS may not be the best term to use and apologise for my use of it.
> 
> And, because my previous post obviously wasn't clear, I wasn't suggesting that you yourself were over-simplifying. If that was directed at anyone, it was referring to others who have made what appear to me to simplistic comments before the one from you that I actually quoted.
> 
> ...


No need to spologise and thatnks for the clarifications

I do not believe that the issue of false memories is a diversion at all, although not for the reasons most people might imagine.

There is the wider issue of false memories that everyone has over time as memories are changed each time we recall them.  It is inevitiable that, even if Virginia Giuffre and Prince Andrew both believe they are telling the truth that they will both have some false memories.

Then there is the issue of Virgina Giuffre's therapist, an issue about which I have insufficient data to comment.

The glaring elephant in the room for those familair with the satanic panic and related mental health quackery and malpractice is that there are various actors with multiple strong connections to the satanic panic getting involved with the Prince Andrew case.  One is the notorious convicted conman Paul Page.  Page has appeared on the youtube channels of 2 people, both of whom have multiple connections to the satanic panic, one of whom, Shaun Attwood, was a very significant promoter of  SRA conspiracy theories before he was forced to remove various videos.  He hosted videos (now removed) of the vile Wilfred Wong currently serving a 22 year jail sentence for the kidnapping of a child at knifepoint which he believed to be rescusing the child from a satanic cult.  I'll post up some evidential screen shots in a moment.

One of the deluded satanic grifters he featured on his channel was the woman behind this little escapade which ended up with some long overdue arrests and confiscation of computers and other equippment (possibly including weaponry they have boasted about, including a crossbow).
*








						'Satanic ritual abuse' protesters gather at Waddesdon Manor
					

Activists apparently protesting against "satanic ritual abuse" descended upon Waddesdon Manor this afternoon.




					www.bucksfreepress.co.uk
				



*


----------



## dessiato (Jan 27, 2022)

justin credible said:


> Thank you for your kind thoughts.  Unfortunately I have been completely without support.  When I have attempted to describe what happened to me and to ask for NHS therapy with a therapist who does not believe in satanic ritual abuse (SRA) I have encountered only further gaslighting from mental health professionals who share the delusion that satanic cults are everywhere, one of whom opined that I was making serious accusations against her friends and colleagues, one of whom told me that he worked with many survivors of SRA and that he did not believe in false memories.
> 
> On other occasions, have had my concerns twisted into “is preoccupied with paranoid delusions that mental health services have been taken over by professionals believing in satanic ritual abuse” and, the shit cherry on the cake, “is preoccupied with anxieties about satanic cults”.
> 
> ...



I'm sorry you've had to go through this. I hope you get the help and support you need.

I also would like to draw everyone's attention to your last paragraph. I'd like it to be wrong, but, sadly,  it isn't.


----------



## justin credible (Jan 27, 2022)

dessiato said:


> I'm sorry you've had to go through this. I hope you get the help and support you need.
> 
> I also would like to draw everyone's attention to your last paragraph. I'd like it to be wrong, but, sadly,  it isn't.


So important that it needs saying again. Also false accusations of sexual abuse are being weaponised by malicious actors, especially the far right.

Many of the actors promoting Qanon and other SRA CTs have links to the far right

eta a really good article about the weaponsing of CSA/CSE by the far right and also highlighting their hypocricy re the abusers in their own ranks.  








						Tommy Robinson is a hypocrite when it comes to opposing child sexual exploitation – HOPE not hate
					

Despite presenting himself as a protector of children and women, Stephen Yaxley-Lennon has repeatedly failed to confront child sexual exploitation and abuse within his own team and amongst his supporters.




					hopenothate.org.uk


----------



## justin credible (Jan 27, 2022)

Please find a screen shot from a video of Paul Page alongside Shaun Attwood, who has also hosted such luminaries as, er, David Icke.  Attwood has promoted Jeanette Archer and various other SRA grifters. 

Interesting podcast here including material about Attwood, Archer and Wong 

eta Shaun Attwood can be heard interviewing Jeanette Archer at 16.21 of the podcast


----------



## gosub (Jan 27, 2022)

equationgirl said:


> Or least worst. I don't think it's a stellar plan.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 27, 2022)

Lawyers comment on the defence:









						Lawyers question strength of Prince Andrew’s response to lawsuit
					

Legal experts question whether document filed with US district court can help royal avoid ‘disastrous’ trial




					www.theguardian.com
				






> Nick Goldstone, head of dispute resolution at Ince Gordon Dadds LLP, said: “There are certain things where it is ludicrous for him to say he has insufficient information to admit or deny. Six months on, he has at least put forward a defence and that is interesting, but it does appear to be a boilerplate exercise, rather over-enthusiastically deployed.”
> 
> Among the allegations from Giuffre’s complaint that Andrew said he could not admit or deny were that:
> 
> ...


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 27, 2022)

two sheds said:


> Lawyers comment on the defence:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


As this thread expected, then.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 27, 2022)

yep that crossed my mind too


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 27, 2022)

two sheds said:


> yep that crossed my mind too


I'm in no doubt that his lawyers probably advised quite strenuously against doing this, but he decided he knew better than his expert advisers.


----------



## UrbaneFox (Jan 28, 2022)

Golf club ex-Captain resigns. 









						Prince Andrew gives up honorary membership at prestigious golf club
					

Duke of York relinquishes his honorary membership of the Royal and Ancient Golf Club of St Andrews.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## spudulike (Jan 28, 2022)

Even though he's given up his membership of The Royal and Ancient Golf Club of St Andrews he's still fighting.

It'll be another matter if he gives up membership of his Tesco Club Card and we hear Lord Lucan is no longer advertising for a flat mate.


----------



## Santino (Jan 28, 2022)

He has also stepped down as Vice-Captain of the Royal Family's pub quiz team, _The Windsor Takes It All._


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 28, 2022)

Santino said:


> He has also stepped down as Vice-Captain of the Royal Family's pub quiz team, _The Windsor Takes It All._


Nice punnage


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 29, 2022)

Seems Andy’s now going with Maxwell wasn’t his mate cos she’s a nonce and when he said Epstein wasn’t his mate and Maxwell was what he meant was Kevin Spacey was the the mate and Maxwell was Spacey’s plus one.

So that’s cleared that up.


----------



## MickiQ (Jan 29, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Seems Andy’s now going with Maxwell wasn’t his mate cos she’s a nonce and when he said Epstein wasn’t his mate and Maxwell was what he meant was Kevin Spacey was the the mate and Maxwell was Spacey’s plus one.
> 
> So that’s cleared that up.


Seriously?? my 18 month old grandson could come up with a better story never mind his 5 year old brother.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 29, 2022)

I would not want Kevin Spacey as a mate.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 29, 2022)

Before long he's going to be left with Savile, Smith and Hamilton as his alibi witnesses


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 29, 2022)

MickiQ said:


> Seriously?? my 18 month old grandson could come up with a better story never mind his 5 year old brother.












						Prince Andrew's 'plans to use shamed actor Kevin Spacey' in bid to clear name
					

It comes as sources say the Duke wants to distance himself from Ghislaine Maxwell - former girlfriend of billionaire paedophile found guilty of five out of six charges of sex trafficking



					www.mirror.co.uk
				




Bally bad luck that every single mate turns out to be a nonce.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 29, 2022)

TopCat said:


> I would not want Kevin Spacey as a mate.



Or a character witness.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 29, 2022)

Not sure that Spacey got invites to any of the Queen's residences. Although perhaps he just wasn't into straight forward shooting weekends.


----------



## Yossarian (Jan 29, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Prince Andrew's 'plans to use shamed actor Kevin Spacey' in bid to clear name
> 
> 
> It comes as sources say the Duke wants to distance himself from Ghislaine Maxwell - former girlfriend of billionaire paedophile found guilty of five out of six charges of sex trafficking
> ...



Nonces all the way down.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 29, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Prince Andrew's 'plans to use shamed actor Kevin Spacey' in bid to clear name
> 
> 
> It comes as sources say the Duke wants to distance himself from Ghislaine Maxwell - former girlfriend of billionaire paedophile found guilty of five out of six charges of sex trafficking
> ...


Omg. I had assumed this was meant as a joke.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 29, 2022)

Raheem said:


> Omg. I had assumed this was meant as a joke.


Same here. I saw it on twitter and didn't click as assumed it was a spoof. 
Dear God.


----------



## Yossarian (Jan 29, 2022)

His lawyers have released proof the photo with Giuffre and Maxwell was faked.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 29, 2022)

Yossarian said:


> His lawyers have released proof the photo with Giuffre and Maxwell was faked.
> 
> View attachment 307994



Spacey must be holding the camera then.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 29, 2022)

Yossarian said:


> His lawyers have released proof the photo with Giuffre and Maxwell was faked.
> 
> View attachment 307994


I'm listening to Beautiful Boys by Cocorosie. I don't think this was their intention and I'm really upset now by the accidental crash.....lol


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 29, 2022)

Yossarian said:


> Nonces all the way down.


Trickledown eco-nonce-ics


----------



## 1927 (Jan 29, 2022)

Raheem said:


> Omg. I had assumed this was meant as a joke.


Me too!


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 29, 2022)

Raheem said:


> Omg. I had assumed this was meant as a joke.


----------



## 1927 (Jan 29, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Prince Andrew's 'plans to use shamed actor Kevin Spacey' in bid to clear name
> 
> 
> It comes as sources say the Duke wants to distance himself from Ghislaine Maxwell - former girlfriend of billionaire paedophile found guilty of five out of six charges of sex trafficking
> ...


Now I'm not a trained lawyer, but notwithstanding that fact I see some serious problems here, apart from the fact that he is calling a aped actor in his defence. The fact that Saocey was not always present when Epstein and Maxwell were with Andy must be a problem. Plus, isnt there already a lot of testimony from members of the royal staff that maxwell was pretty much a daily visitor and was given the freedom to arrive at any time?


----------



## two sheds (Jan 29, 2022)

He could call me as a witness I've never actually seen him do anything wrong


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 29, 2022)

Raheem said:


> Omg. I had assumed this was meant as a joke.


Andrew is about as good at comedy as he is keeping hold of his privileges.


----------



## Funky_monks (Jan 29, 2022)

Does he know anyone at all who isn't a nonce?


----------



## MickiQ (Jan 29, 2022)

two sheds said:


> He could call me as a witness I've never actually seen him do anything wrong


So you didn't watch that magnificent interview then? That was a masterclass in how to look as guilty as fuck without actually admitting anything.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 29, 2022)

I wasn't there so I doubt my testimony would count.


----------



## xenon (Jan 29, 2022)

his lawyers must just be sitting there incredulous when he comes up with these  unhinged suggestions. Either that or they‘re trolling him.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 29, 2022)

xenon said:


> his lawyers must just be sitting there incredulous when he comes up with these  unhinged suggestions. Either that or they‘re trolling him.


Someone has to take on the hopeless cases. They get paid either way I guess.


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 30, 2022)

His lawyers must be wondering why they took the case, as he appears completely determined to undermine his own case xenon 

I bet they're thinking of the billable rate a lot.


----------



## xenon (Jan 30, 2022)

But you know what I mean, how do they keep a straight face. They must just look at each other with expressions of, is this for fucking real?


----------



## xenon (Jan 30, 2022)

when is he calling Rolf Harris as a character witness?


----------



## 1927 (Jan 30, 2022)

xenon said:


> his lawyers must just be sitting there incredulous when he comes up with these  unhinged suggestions. Either that or they‘re trolling him.


How do we know it isn't his lawyers dreaming up these Ideas?


----------



## Weller (Jan 30, 2022)

xenon said:


> when is he calling Rolf Harris as a character witness?


Well he spent some time at the palace when he painted the queen seems like many famous nonces visited  perhaps if hes now bringing in visiting abusers hes met over the years as character witnesses theres a few choices   




> Exclusive:
> Rolf Harris victim wrote to QUEEN warning her he was pervert as he painted monarch​The anonymous letters were passed to Scotland Yard’s Royal Protection Group who deemed them credible and they were logged as intelligence.But they remained filed until Harris, 84, officially became a suspect in 2012.


Rolf Harris victim wrote to QUEEN warning her he was pervert as he painted monarch


----------



## tim (Jan 30, 2022)

xenon said:


> when is he calling Rolf Harris as a character witness?


He'll be cautious and stick to calling Jake the Peg.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 30, 2022)

Wait so the Kevin Spacey thing isn't a joke? Jesus christ


----------



## High Voltage (Jan 30, 2022)

Raheem said:


> Omg. I had assumed this was meant as a joke.


As did I. You couldn't make this up


----------



## TopCat (Jan 30, 2022)

So they get to ask in court, detailed questions to Spacey regarding the numerous and credible reports of him sexually assaulting men over decades? Great stuff, long overdue.


----------



## killer b (Jan 30, 2022)

It doesn't seem likely that spacey would be very interested in providing evidence, bearing that in mind


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 30, 2022)

equationgirl said:


> His lawyers must be wondering why they took the case, as he appears completely determined to undermine his own case xenon
> 
> I bet they're thinking of the billable rate a lot.


That's all they've been thinking of given the paucity of the case they're making


----------



## 1927 (Jan 30, 2022)

Funny how Spacey was never previously mentioned! Are there photos of ExHRH and Kevin?


----------



## Kevbad the Bad (Jan 30, 2022)

Weller said:


> Well he spent some time at the palace when he painted the queen seems like many famous nonces visited  perhaps if hes now bringing in visiting abusers hes met over the years as character witnesses theres a few choices
> 
> 
> 
> ...


When I first skimmed this I thought it read "Rolf Harris wrote to QUEEN warning her he was a pervert". Anything is possible in this alternate reality we live in.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 30, 2022)

1927 said:


> Funny how Spacey was never previously mentioned! Are there photos of ExHRH and Kevin?




There's Kev and child sex trafficker Maxwell sat on the thrones in Buck House...



Kev wasn't at the straightforward shooting weekend. Nor at Balmoral. Nor at Bea's birthday bash, those events were restricted to just the two convicted nonces.


----------



## 1927 (Jan 30, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> There's Kev and child sex trafficker Maxwell sat on the thrones in Buck House...
> 
> View attachment 308031
> 
> Kev wasn't at the straightforward shooting weekend. Nor at Balmoral. Nor at Bea's birthday bash, those events were restricted to just the two convicted nonces.


Think there were more than the 2 nonces, Weinstein was there too I think from memory!


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 30, 2022)

1927 said:


> Think there were more than the 2 nonces, Weinstein was there too I think from memory!




A nexus of noncery.


----------



## clicker (Jan 30, 2022)

They're like London buses....


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 30, 2022)

I have know many people who turned out to be rotters and serial killers but HRH Randy Andrew does seem to have had a lifetime of extraordinarily bad luck with his mateage


----------



## Flavour (Jan 30, 2022)

is there a trustworthy non-Mail/Sun/Express link for this Kevin Spacey stuff?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 30, 2022)

Flavour said:


> is there a trustworthy non-Mail/Sun/Express link for this Kevin Spacey stuff?


So you don't trust the usual suspects?


----------



## TopCat (Jan 30, 2022)

Spacey is expected to throw himself onto the live grenade to save his royal arseness. 
Spacey himself is a total egotistical bastard who thinks the world revolves around him. 
I can’t see him even agreeing to give evidence.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 30, 2022)

TopCat said:


> Spacey is expected to throw himself onto the live grenade to save his royal arseness.
> Spacey himself is a total egotistical bastard who thinks the world revolves around him.
> I can’t see him even agreeing to give evidence.


Or him saying he was coerced by the perverted prince


----------



## Weller (Jan 30, 2022)

1927 said:


> Funny how Spacey was never previously mentioned! Are there photos of ExHRH and Kevin?


probably not he was usually out sorting  Pizza whenever  they visited but you never know these days Maxwell and Epstein  were supposed to have kept cctv and photos of celebs and we havent really seen much of what was in thier safes despite court cases


----------



## justin credible (Jan 31, 2022)

I wondered whether readers would be interested to read the many claims and accusations made by Virginia Giuffre in her book Billionaire's Playboy Club.





__





						DocumentCloud
					






					www.documentcloud.org


----------



## justin credible (Jan 31, 2022)

Just an update of the arrests in this case, the people arrested are facing charges of conspiracy to murder.  I have been following the activities of this network for some time.  Since it started in fact, as the people invovled have network connections to the psychologist who abused me.  I won't be commenting more in this case here as a) investigative journalists are all over it and b) I do not wish to prejudice any future trial.  I would like to say that I am aware of, and can prove with evidence, that sinister actors (some working in NHS mental health services) have been abusing vulnerable people for some years and radicalising them.  For the avoidance of doubt, I am not a fan of Prince Andrew, however the multiple connections of some of his accusers to the networks that abused me and have abused other vulnerable people need to be exposed before someone is actually murdered.  
       'Satanic ritual abuse' protesters gather at Waddesdon Manor


----------



## dessiato (Jan 31, 2022)

justin credible said:


> Just an update of the arrests in this case, the people arrested are facing charges of conspiracy to murder.  I have been following the activities of this network for some time.  Since it started in fact, as the people invovled have network connections to the psychologist who abused me.  I won't be commenting more in this case here as a) investigative journalists are all over it and b) I do not wish to prejudice any future trial.  I would like to say that I am aware of, and can prove with evidence, that sinister actors (some working in NHS mental health services) have been abusing vulnerable people for some years and radicalising them.  For the avoidance of doubt, I am not a fan of Prince Andrew, however the multiple connections of some of his accusers to the networks that abused me and have abused other vulnerable people need to be exposed before someone is actually murdered.
> 'Satanic ritual abuse' protesters gather at Waddesdon Manor


Whilst I have immense sympathy for you, and I truly do, perhaps you’d be better off with  a separate thread where you’d be able to get help/advice that you’re unlikely to get here, because of the topic of this thread.


----------



## justin credible (Jan 31, 2022)

> dessiato said:
> 
> 
> > Whilst I have immense sympathy for you, and I truly do, perhaps you’d be better off with  a separate thread where you’d be able to get help/advice that you’re unlikely to get here, because of the topic of this thread.



The thing is, the various actors promoting the satanic panic and / or linked to Carl Beech's bullshit are all over the Prince Andrew case

As I commented earler, the recent ITV programme about the Prince Andrew case featured the convicted conman Paul Page (who has multiple connections to extremely controversial actors promoting SRA / Qanon conspiracy theories) and also the journalist Annette Witheridge who is a fascinating person with a history of making false allegations against Harvey Proctor, a man who was falsely accused by SRA fantasist Carl Beech.

While I find Harvey Proctor’s political views odious I believe that whatever a person’s political views, they should not be falsely reported as having AIDS as reported by Annette Witheridge, or falsely accused of being part of a VIP satanic paedophile ring, as Proctor was by Carl Beech.

If you search google for Annette Witheridge you will find a clip from the After Dark programme in which Harvey Proctor confronts her about her false allegations against him and she admits that the allegations were false.

eta



Harvey Proctor’s situation resonates in some ways with Prince Andrew’s situation.  Proctor was convicted of sexual offences, he pleaded guilty as described in the link below.  He is not completely innocent of everything just as Prince Andrew is not completely innocent of everything.




__





						The Glasgow Herald - Google News Archive Search
					





					news.google.com
				




While Proctor was guilty of paying 17 year old minors (referred to at the time as “rent boys") for spanking sessions, he later went on to have his life completely destroyed by false allegations of being part of an elite, murdering, satanic, paedophile ring by Carl Beech.

It is extremely important to notice and understand the fact that just because a person did a bad thing, or several bad things, it does not mean that they are therefore guilty of other, much more serious, bad things.  If we all believe that people are guilty of terrible crimes based on other lesser crimes we can just dispense with criminal trials altogether and find people guilty in the court of social media based on prior acts / convictions.

The reason I am making a big deal of this is not because I wish to support Prince Andrew or Harvey Proctor but because fake allegations can destroy the life of any innocent person including potentially any of the posters here.   If affluent, privileged, influential people such as Prince Andrew and Harvey Proctor can be subjected to trial by media then you need to think about how easy it would be for any ordinary person to be utterly destroyed by false allegations.


----------



## justin credible (Jan 31, 2022)

> The thing more than anything that tells you that the whole idea of false memories in this case is a desperate and cynical diversionary defence strategy is that there has been no suggestion at any point from VG that her memories have been anything but continuously present. There is no rupture or “recovery” or period of forgetting. She has claimed that she had an experience that has affected her every day since it happened. That is absolutely not the pattern associated with implanted memories.



Earlier on in the thread I responded to another poster who subsequently edited their post.  I C&Pd the text and would like to repond to it anyway. 

My response is this

You may be right about this.  However I would like to ask you whether you are absolutely sure you are correct about VG’s narrative being continual as other, much more credible witnesses (as in witnesses who were not as high up the sexually abusive recruitment pyramid as VG) have made interesting claims that validate some elements of her claims and yet refute others. 

e.g. the testimony of Carolyn Andriano a much more credible witness than Giuffre IMO









						Virginia Giuffre told me in 2001 she slept with Prince Andrew, witness says
					

The claims by Carolyn Andriano, who testified at Ghislaine Maxwell’s trial, will add pressure on the prince




					www.theguardian.com
				





So Carolyn Andriano, a victim of Epstein and Maxwell, claimed that Virginia had phoned her boasting of having sexual relations with Prince Andrew.  The witness claims that VG also seemed thrilled and enthusiastic about the situation in the phone calls.  

The scenario described by Carolyn Andriano seems credible to me.  

I think it is highly likely that Prince Andrew, at that time in his life, newly divorced and single, was surrounded by many apparently enthusiastic young women and it may be possible that he had sexual relations with so many of them that he does not remember Ms Giuffre.  It is also possible that he does remember her but is lying about it for obvious reasons.  

While I believe it is credible that he may have had sexual relations with Ms Giuffre I find it far less likely that he would have knowingly raped her, for the simple reason that, as an entitled, privileged royal male who was at that time 2nd in line to the throne, surrounded by willing and enthusiastic young women, why would he have taken the massive risk of raping a woman?

He may be a spoiled, entitled, temper tantrum prone man but this does not make him a paedophile.  Of course it may also be that he believed that he was involved in consensual sex with an 18 year old woman and only later discovered that she was legally a minor.  Given Epstein’s oft reported hidden cameras and likely linked kompromat harvesting activities this could be entirely possible, highly likely in fact.  

Unfortunately for Prince Andrew his arrogance and ill judged interviews have left him in a situation in which it is very difficult for him to now be honest.


----------



## justin credible (Jan 31, 2022)

There is also the issue of the fact that many victims of sex trafficking do not know that they are trafficked.  Many perceive their traffickers as their friends.  Many victims recruit other females (or in some cases males) to sex trafficking networks for various reasons.  Those reasons can be on a continuum of motivations, with at one end the chance to make money and to please the trafficker (who may be perceived as a friend or lover) and at the other end there may be a genuine belief that the vulnerable person being recruited is being helped to better themselves, pay off debts or some other reason.  

Most recruiting of victims happens somewhere in the middle of the continuum and significant cognitive dissonance is involved.  If we consider this in a nuanced way then it is entirely possible that Prince Andrew could have had what he had every reasons to believe was consensual sexual activity with a young woman who was trafficked but who did not realise that she was trafficked.  She may have acted as though she was consenting but later come to believe that she was under duress.  

Virginia Giuffre was, according to various news reports of Epstein’s victims testimonies, nearer to the top of the exploitation pyramid than the bottom.  While she was not as high up as Ghislaine Maxwell she bears significant culpability for the exploitation of many other young women and girls. VG has admitted that she recruited minor girls for Epstein.   Carolyn Andriano , whom I consider to be a credible witness, has stated that Giuffre recruited her to Epstein’s sex trafficking pyramidal enterprise when Carolyn was 14 years old and Giuffre was an adult.  If true this makes Giuffre someone who participated in the sexual exploitation and trafficking of minors.  

This article casts a different perspective on things
also see








						Jeffrey Epstein 'sex slave' was a 'money-hungry sex kitten'
					

Former companions said Virginia Roberts, 31, lived a lavish lifestyle and never seemed like she was being held captive as she was part of Jeffrey Epstein's harem in Palm Beach, Florida.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




VG also failed to give evidence at Ghislaine Maxwell’s trial.   I cannot understand why, if she is such a warrior for truth and justice, she would not wish to give testimony at the trial.  It really does not make any sense at all.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 31, 2022)

I think folks should pay attention to the points that justin credible is making.


----------



## bluescreen (Jan 31, 2022)

Giuffre was 17, FFS. 
You do realise, don't you, that many of the Rotherham victims thought those abusing them were their boyfriends? Someone in that position isn't thinking straight.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 31, 2022)

justin credible said:


> VG also failed to give evidence at Ghislaine Maxwell’s trial.   I cannot understand why, if she is such a warrior for truth and justice, she would not wish to give testimony at the trial.  It really does not make any sense at all.



Neither the prosecution nor the defence asked her to. You can't just rock up at a criminal trial and start giving evidence.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 31, 2022)

justin credible said:


> There is also the issue of the fact that many victims of sex trafficking do not know that they are trafficked.  Many perceive their traffickers as their friends.  Many victims recruit other females (or in some cases males) to sex trafficking networks for various reasons.  Those reasons can be on a continuum of motivations, with at one end the chance to make money and to please the trafficker (who may be perceived as a friend or lover) and at the other end there may be a genuine belief that the vulnerable person being recruited is being helped to better themselves, pay off debts or some other reason.
> 
> Most recruiting of victims happens somewhere in the middle of the continuum and significant cognitive dissonance is involved.  If we consider this in a nuanced way then it is entirely possible that Prince Andrew could have had what he had every reasons to believe was consensual sexual activity with a young woman who was trafficked but who did not realise that she was trafficked.  She may have acted as though she was consenting but later come to believe that she was under duress.
> 
> ...


 a daily mail article slagging off prince Andrew's accuser? fuck off


----------



## justin credible (Jan 31, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> Giuffre was 17, FFS.
> You do realise, don't you, that many of the Rotherham victims thought those abusing them were their boyfriends? Someone in that position isn't thinking straight.


Of course I understand how it works. 
In many ways the situation of Virginia Giuffre resonates with that of Shamina Begum
People can be recruited, radicalised / brainwashed and do terrible things to others.   If someone is abused and trafficked as a minor but goes on to abuse / recruit others as a minor and even subsequently as a (by now vulnerable) adult how do we determine their culpability?  it is complex of course.
The Epstein cult has many similarities to the NXIVM cult, a pyramid / MLM scheme of sexual abuse and kompromat harvesting
Again I am not saying that Andrew is guilty or innocent, simply pointing out that things are complex


----------



## justin credible (Jan 31, 2022)

Kaka Tim said:


> a daily mail article slagging off prince Andrew's accuser? fuck off


A mail article featuring people who used to know Virgina Giuffre 
On its own it could be dismissed  as victim smearing, possibly, but the accounts of VG's former associates are give credence to the very credible account of Carolyn Andriano in the Graun


----------



## discokermit (Jan 31, 2022)

justin credible said:


> A mail article quoting an Epstein survivor - so if a survivor is featured in the mail we should ignore her?
> Thank you for your insight


i think we can ignore articles that describe victims as money hungry sex kittens.


----------



## Athos (Jan 31, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Neither the prosecution nor the defence asked her to. You can't just rock up at a criminal trial and start giving evidence.


I think the fact the prosecution chose not to call her isn't a great endorsement. It does seem odd, given how much she has to say about Maxwell's role in Epstein's network.  The most obvious reasons not to call her would be concerns over her own credibility and culpability, which are the areas Andrew's lawyers will gun for.


----------



## LDC (Jan 31, 2022)

Starting to feel like you're spamming this thread tbh justin credible.

People splurging loads of deeply personal stuff on this issue on a thread that's a bit related, but about a different topic doesn't usually go very well, just for your info.


----------



## justin credible (Jan 31, 2022)

Also there are many, many things about the Epstein cult / abuse pyramid that I do not know about 
I am not claiming to know everything of course, just expressing curiosity about many things that, certainly amongst activists against the Qanon and anti-vaxx debunking communities have generated immense curiosity 

All I have time for right now


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 31, 2022)

Athos said:


> I think the fact the prosecution chose not to call her isn't a great endorsement. It does seem odd, given how much she has to say about Maxwell's role in Epstein's network.  The most obvious reason not to call her would be concerns over her own credibility, which is the area Andrew's lawyers will gun for.



It has nothing to do with her though. I was replying to:



> I cannot understand why, if she is such a warrior for truth and justice, she would not wish to give testimony at the trial.


- she wasn't asked. By all accounts they only asked 4 out of possibly >100, keeping it simple to reduce wiggle room.


----------



## justin credible (Jan 31, 2022)

discokermit said:


> i think we can ignore articles that describe victims as money hungry sex kittens.


it really depends upon which survivor you give more credence to 

According to Ms Andriano, Ms Giuffre didn’t appear upset over her claim she slept with Andrew.

In fact, she stated, “she thought it was pretty cool” and “couldn’t believe that she got to sleep with Prince Andrew”.

She added: “I don’t think she deserves any compensation.

“I don’t think she was coerced into doing anything.”

Ms Andriano said she believed Ms Giuffre deserves the same treatment as Maxwell since she “trafficked” her into a “world of spiralling downward slopes”.

At the time she was recruited Ms Andriano said Ms Giuffre, 38, gave her a revealing top and a pair of “tight skimpy shorts” and told her “whatever you do, don’t say your age”.

She says she then went to Epstein’s home in Palm Beach, Florida, where she watched Ms Giuffre massage him and have sex with him before Maxwell took her phone number and gave her $300.

In seeking to turn the tables on Ms Giuffre, the Duke’s US lawyer Andrew Brettler claims she was involved in the “wilful recruitment and trafficking of young girls for sexual abuse”.

The court papers quote Crystal Figueroa, the sister of one of Giuffre’s ex-boyfriends, who claims Andrew’s accuser asked her for help.

Crystal said: “[Giuffre] would say to me, ‘Do you know any girls who are kind of slutty?’”

The Duke has consistently and vehemently denied all of the claims made by Ms Giuffre.









						Prince Andrew’s lawyers believe Ghislaine Maxwell victim could 'help clear him'
					

The Duke of York’s legal team believe Carolyn Andriano may hold crucial evidence that could bolster Andrew’s bid to have the case against him thrown out




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## MickiQ (Jan 31, 2022)

Daily Mail doesn't have a lot of credibility when it comes to being an independent and unbiased source of news let alone a nearly 7 year old article that has long been overtaken by events.


----------



## Athos (Jan 31, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> It has nothing to do with her though. I was replying to:
> 
> 
> - she wasn't asked. By all accounts they only asked 4 out of possibly >100, keeping it simple to reduce wiggle room.


Yes, the claim that she chose not to is misconceived. Mine was a separate point about why the prosecution chose not to call her.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 31, 2022)

Athos said:


> Yes, the claim that she chose not to is misconceived. Mine was a separate point about why the prosecution chose not to call her.



Sure, possibly a little ill-timed in the context of our credible friend's post.


----------



## justin credible (Jan 31, 2022)

MickiQ said:


> Daily Mail doesn't have a lot of credibility when it comes to being an independent and unbiased source of news let alone a nearly 7 year old article that has long been overtaken by events.


er, OK, maybe the Jan 22 Mirror article would meet your approval


----------



## justin credible (Jan 31, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Sure, possibly a little ill-timed in the context of our credible friend's post.


why ill timed?

He makes a good point, yes she can't just rock up and give evidence but it is curious that a) she wasn't called to give evidence and b) given that she is no stranger to making her voice heard in the media she did not kick up a fuss about not being called.  I would have done in her position as would anyone I would have thought


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 31, 2022)

justin credible said:


> why ill timed?
> 
> He makes a good point, yes she can't just rock up and give evidence but it is curious that a) she wasn't called to give evidence and b) given that she is no stranger to making her voice heard in the media she did not kick up a fuss about not being called.  I would have done in her position as would anyone I would have thought


have you ever kicked up a fuss about not being called as a witness in a trial?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 31, 2022)

justin credible said:


> why ill timed?
> 
> He makes a good point, yes she can't just rock up and give evidence but it is curious that a) she wasn't called to give evidence and b) given that she is no stranger to making her voice heard in the media she did not kick up a fuss about not being called.  I would have done in her position as would anyone I would have thought






Bahnhof Strasse said:


> By all accounts they only asked 4 out of possibly >100, keeping it simple to reduce wiggle room.



You don't get the oppertunity to "kick up a fuss" about being called or not as a witness in a criminal trial. If as you suggest her credibility is lacking then surely the defence would have called her to undermine the prosecution's case. But they didn't. Puzzle on that for a bit.


----------



## MickiQ (Jan 31, 2022)

justin credible said:


> er, OK, maybe the Jan 22 Mirror article would meet your approval


My approval or opinion isn't really needed by anyone is it? Based on what I've seen and read myself  I'm firmly on Team Giuffre rather than Team Nonce at this point, however yes we don't all know the facts of the case as they say. However a US Federal Judge (who might reasonably be expected to know a bit about US law and whether a case is sound or not) has been sufficiently convinced by what he has seen to send the matter to trial. If he thought her case was weak, he had the absolute power to stop it there and then, he hasn't done so. That would seem to me her claims are credible, as to whether they are true that's kind of what the jury gets to decide.


----------



## justin credible (Jan 31, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> You don't get the oppertunity to "kick up a fuss" about being called or not as a witness in a criminal trial. If as you suggest her credibility is lacking then surely the defence would have called her to undermine the prosecution's case. But they didn't. Puzzle on that for a bit.


Perhaps I worded my post badly. Am running late. 
The thing is that VG has been included in various documentaries and news articles about the Epstein / Maxwell / Prince Andrew case
In some she is seen standing alongside other survivors presenting a united front against abusers
However things are complex.  A very credible survivor has made very serious allegations about VG.  Not all Epstein survivors view VG in the same way
Of course things are immensely complex, not least of all because this horrific abusive MLM cult had at its centre the exploitation of victims by coercing them into recruiting others.  Many cults and trafficking networks operate in the same way. 
I do not know the truth
I do not know who is innocent and who is guilty
However posters here seem to be of the opinion that we must all believe everything that VG says and that to do otherwise is victim smearing / victim blaming
My point is that, when someone is both very obviously a victim / survivor but has also been involved as a recruiter into a sex trafficking network we should proceed with extreme caution.  That caution should be further informed by the variety of actors linked to Qanon / Carl Beech who are becoming involved with this case.


----------



## justin credible (Jan 31, 2022)

MickiQ said:


> I'm firmly on Team Giuffre rather than Team Nonce at this point, however yes we don't all know the facts of the case as they say.


It is this kind of binary thinking and lack of appreciation of complexity that I find extremely disturbing and that may get people into problems with m'learned friend later down the road that concerns me

I need to go now but as you were


----------



## Athos (Jan 31, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> If as you suggest her credibility is lacking then surely the defence would have called her to undermine the prosecution's case.


That makes no sense at all.  It wouldn't undermine the prosecution case for the defence to discredit a witness they've called, and upon whom the prosecution are not relying!


----------



## Athos (Jan 31, 2022)

MickiQ said:


> My approval or opinion isn't really needed by anyone is it? Based on what I've seen and read myself  I'm firmly on Team Giuffre rather than Team Nonce at this point, however yes we don't all know the facts of the case as they say. However a US Federal Judge (who might reasonably be expected to know a bit about US law and whether a case is sound or not) has been sufficiently convinced by what he has seen to send the matter to trial. If he thought her case was weak, he had the absolute power to stop it there and then, he hasn't done so. That would seem to me her claims are credible, as to whether they are true that's kind of what the jury gets to decide.


Yeah, there's clearly enough of an arguable case to put before a jury.  But I don't think it's unreasonable to acknowledge that question marks over the plaintiff's credibility and culpability are likely to pose challenges.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 31, 2022)

justin credible said:


> Perhaps I worded my post badly. Am running late.
> The thing is that VG has been included in various documentaries and news articles about the Epstein / Maxwell / Prince Andrew case
> In some she is seen standing alongside other survivors presenting a united front against abusers
> However things are complex.  A very credible survivor has made very serious allegations about VG.  Not all Epstein survivors view VG in the same way
> ...



How can she simultaneously be under coercive control by rich and powerful people yet also acting under her own agency?
Answers on a postcard to the usual address.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 31, 2022)

Athos said:


> That makes no sense at all.  It wouldn't undermine the prosecution case for the defence to discredit a witness they've called, and upon whom the prosecution are not relying!



If the most high profile alleged victim could be shown to be lying that would undermine the idea that the others' testimony is truthful.


----------



## Athos (Jan 31, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> If the most high profile alleged victim could be shown to be lying that would undermine the idea that the others' testimony is truthful.



No it wouldn't; that's simply not how the law/trials work.

If the prosecution case is that a defendant did thing x, then the defence casting doubt on whether or not they did thing y is, at best, irrelevant.

Perhaps you should ask yourself why, given that she was the most high profile complainant, the prosecution didn't call her?

Whether or not you belive he's guilty, and that she's telling the truth, you have to acknowledge that some of what she says appears to be at odds with the testimony of other victims (most notably Carolyn Adriano).  Which will be make her claim more difficult.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 31, 2022)

Athos said:


> Perhaps you should ask yourself why, given that she was the most high profile complainant, the prosecution didn't call her?



As stated, they chose 4 out of many, the 4 with what they considered to have the most compelling evidence against Maxwell (not Epstein).


----------



## Athos (Jan 31, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> ... the 4 with what they considered to have the most compelling evidence...


Quite.


----------



## MickiQ (Jan 31, 2022)

Athos said:


> Yeah, there's clearly enough of an arguable case to put before a jury.  But I don't think it's unreasonable to acknowledge that question marks over the plaintiff's credibility and culpability are likely to pose challenges.


I would lay good money that the crux of his case is going to be undermining her credibility, since ultimately it comes down to his word vs hers.  I would presume she knows what she is likely to be in for.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 31, 2022)

MickiQ said:


> I would lay good money that the crux of his case is going to be undermining her credibility, since ultimately it comes down to his word vs hers.  I would presume she knows what she is likely to be in for.


yes, because she will have a) read the papers, or at least seen his strategy unveiled on the internet; and b) have spoken to her attorneys about it


----------



## Athos (Jan 31, 2022)

MickiQ said:


> I would lay good money that the crux of his case is going to be undermining her credibility, since ultimately it comes down to his word vs hers.  I would presume she knows what she is likely to be in for.


I'm sure. Suspect it'll suit both parties to settle, if terms can be reached.


----------



## RainbowTown (Jan 31, 2022)

Athos said:


> I'm sure. Suspect it'll suit both parties to settle, if terms can be reached.



Yes, and it will be his lawyers who will blink first. I've no doubt about that.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 31, 2022)

Although she says she won’t settle if it means Andrew avoids culpability whilst that’s exactly what he’ll probably want so 🤷‍♀️


----------



## MickiQ (Jan 31, 2022)

I'm not sure he'll settle since there is no way that he can do that without it appearing he's admitting guilt and paying her off to shut her up. His reputation is in tatters and he is just too high profile for it to be simply forgotten. If he is to return his previous life as jet setting benefit scrounger then he needs to discredit her. 
We've got months of wild speculation to look forward to, well he hasn't but lots of people have.


----------



## Athos (Jan 31, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Although she says she won’t settle if it means Andrew avoids culpability whilst that’s exactly what he’ll probably want so 🤷‍♀️


Her lawyer, David Boies is reported to have said:

“We would be unlikely to settle in a situation in which somebody just handed over a cheque. So if Prince Andrew maintains, ‘I’ve never heard of this person’, ‘I don’t know who she is’, ‘The photographs are fake’, then I don’t think we would settle on that basis.

“That said, if you had a settlement that was large enough to be, in effect, a vindication, then it’s something we would obviously look at.”

I think they're preparing the ground.  If I had to guess, I'd say it'll be a confidential settlement (for a hefty sum), without a formal admission of liability.

It'll be enough for her supporters to spin it as an effective admission, and his to spin it as no finding against him, and a pragmatic decision merely to put all this behind him.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 31, 2022)

I have no legal background, but why the hell would you settle out of court if you’re convinced of your innocence? I don’t have any money, but if I did, I wouldn’t.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 31, 2022)

On a separate but related point, if the Palace (“the Firm”) were convinced of his case, they’d be defending him, not cutting him adrift. I’d have thought.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 31, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> On a separate but related point, if the Palace (“the Firm”) were convinced of his case, they’d be defending him, not cutting him adrift. I’d have thought.


Yeh it's like they are persuaded of his guilt


----------



## LDC (Jan 31, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> I have no legal background, but why the hell would you settle out of court if you’re convinced of your innocence? I don’t have any money, but if I did, I wouldn’t.



Because court is a deeply horrible and upsetting experience for many, especially as a woman in a rape/sexual assault trial. And especially when it's going to be so public with details of your life splashed all over the worldwide press. And there's no guarantee of winning at the end, whereas settling out of court avoids all those things.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 31, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> I have no legal background, but why the hell would you settle out of court if you’re convinced of your innocence? I don’t have any money, but if I did, I wouldn’t.


Yeh no one gets rich by handing over vast sums in out of court settlements


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 31, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh it's like they are persuaded of his guilt


It’s certainly the message they know full well they’re giving out. They have long practice in the science of subtle messaging, so it’s not as if they’re oblivious.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 31, 2022)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Because court is a deeply horrible and upsetting experience for many, especially as a woman in a rape/sexual assault trial. And especially when it's going to be so public with details of your life splashed all over the worldwide press. And there's no guarantee of winning at the end, whereas settling out of court avoids all those things.


I think dlr is talking about prince andrew


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 31, 2022)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Because court is a deeply horrible and upsetting experience for many, especially as a woman in a rape/sexual assault trial. And especially when it's going to be so public with details of your life splashed all over the worldwide press. And there's no guarantee of winning at the end, whereas settling out of court avoids all those things.


Oh, of course. I was meaning Andrew not VG.  I wouldn’t blame her in the least.


----------



## MickiQ (Jan 31, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> I have no legal background, but why the hell would you settle out of court if you’re convinced of your innocence? I don’t have any money, but if I did, I wouldn’t.


On that note apparently HWCS doesn't have much in the way of spare dosh either, it might be difficult for him to offer a generous out of court settlement if there is no guarantee that his Mum/Bro/British Taxpayer will sub him.


----------



## Athos (Jan 31, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> I have no legal background, but why the hell would you settle out of court if you’re convinced of your innocence? I don’t have any money, but if I did, I wouldn’t.


Because going to court is an expensive and uncomfortable gamble. Even if you know you *should* win, you have to accept there's often a real chance you won't.

Of course, there's even more of an incentive if you know you're as guilty as hell!


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 31, 2022)

Athos said:


> Of course, there's even more of an incentive if you know your as guilty as hell!


And that’s what everyone will think. The deal will refer to no admission of guilt, but everyone will think “but it is really”.


----------



## Athos (Jan 31, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> And that’s what everyone will think. The deal will refer to no admission of guilt, but everyone will think “but it is really”.


That's my suspicion. For him, better to pay it off and have no formal finding or admission of guilt.  For her, better to get a payout and the knowledge that everyone thinks his willingness to settle points to his guilt.   A settlement is a win/win.


----------



## Spymaster (Jan 31, 2022)

MickiQ said:


> I'm not sure he'll settle since there is no way that he can do that without it appearing he's admitting guilt and paying her off to shut her up. His reputation is in tatters and he is just too high profile for it to be simply forgotten. If he is to return his previous life as jet setting benefit scrounger then he needs to discredit her.
> We've got months of wild speculation to look forward to, well he hasn't but lots of people have.


I think he'd settle in a heartbeat given the option.

And it would most certainly be forgotten, particularly among the people that he mixes with. It would be said that he was never found guilty and settled in order to end the whole episode. If he's found 'guilty' by a jury, _then _he may be cut adrift by elements of his social circle, but otherwise he'll be swanning around with them again within a couple of years.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 31, 2022)

Athos said:


> That's my suspicion. For him, better to pay it off and have no formal finding or admission of guilt.  For her, better to get a payout and the knowledge that everyone thinks his willingness to settle points to his guilt.   A settlement is a win/win.


Yes, I know. That’s what I’m saying. If he was convinced of his innocence (like if he could remember who he’d slept with, like I can), he’d be like “bring it on”.  If he’s willing to settle then he’s willing for everyone to think he did it.


----------



## Spymaster (Jan 31, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> Yes, I know. That’s what I’m saying. If he was convinced of his innocence (like if he could remember who he’d slept with, like I can), he’d be like “bring it on”.  If he’s willing to settle then he’s willing for everyone to think he did it.



People will think he did it regardless of the outcome of any court case. He's clutching at straws in a hope to limit the, already massive, damage to his reputation and to be able to cast an element of doubt on his guilt that he can reference in his future life. "I was never convicted, therefore I didn't do it". And there'd be plenty of people who'd go along with that. Also, by indicating he's prepared to go all the way in court, Giuffre's side are more likely to settle eventually.


----------



## LDC (Jan 31, 2022)

Ah, facepalm myself for mixing up what you meant danny la rouge, sorry.

The reason for settling out of court is some variation on that "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt" isn't it? If he settles he can claim innocence forever, no matter what the world thinks. Go to court and, well...

It's common for people to plead innocence right up until the last moment isn't it, as some bargaining chip/desperate hope.


----------



## Athos (Jan 31, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> Yes, I know. That’s what I’m saying. If he was convinced of his innocence (like if he could remember who he’d slept with, like I can), he’d be like “bring it on”.  If he’s willing to settle then he’s willing for everyone to think he did it.


They'll think that whatever. The best he can get from the situation now is to avoid a court finding that, such that he can assert the presumption of innocence.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 31, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> People will think he did it regardless of the outcome of any court case. He's clutching at straws in a hope to limit the, already massive, damage to his reputation and to be able to cast an element of doubt on his guilt that he can reference in his future life. "I was never convicted, therefore I didn't do it". And there'd be plenty of people who'd go along with that. Also, by indicating he's prepared to go all the way in court, it's more Giuffre's side are more likely to settle eventually.


I mean, anyone who watched that interview thinks he did it. Those were not the arguments of someone who knew they’d done nothing wrong.

Plus his previous defence that Epstein was Maxwell’s “plus one” is, shall we say, even less compelling now.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 31, 2022)

Anyway, I’m not saying anything new. Just hoping the cunt gets what he deserves. Which I actually doubt.


----------



## clicker (Jan 31, 2022)

I honestly don't think he cares what 'the public' think of him.
He just wants to be able to say he wasn't found guilty in court.
That'd be enough for him. He doesn't feel answerable to anyone else.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 31, 2022)

Everyone seems certain he is guilty, but guilty of what exactly? It seems to me there is a relatively broad range of things that he could be guilty of, whether from a technical or "moral" point of view. Maybe you take the view that it doesn't matter.


----------



## Athos (Jan 31, 2022)

teuchter said:


> Everyone seems certain he is guilty, but guilty of what exactly? It seems to me there is a relatively broad range of things that he could be guilty of, whether from a technical or "moral" point of view. Maybe you take the view that it doesn't matter.


Well, her claim is that he had sex with her knowing she'd been trafficked, such that she she wasn't able to consent.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 31, 2022)

teuchter said:


> Everyone seems certain he is guilty, but guilty of what exactly? It seems to me there is a relatively broad range of things that he could be guilty of, whether from a technical or "moral" point of view. Maybe you take the view that it doesn't matter.


See Athos ‘s post above.  That’s the allegation that Andrew made himself sound decidedly shifty in denying.  

He knew the circumstances that led to her being in that position and he took advantage anyway.  And of course it matters.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 31, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> He knew the circumstances that led to her being in that position


That seems one of the areas where things are not very clear.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jan 31, 2022)

Well he can hardly argue that he was unaware of the circumstances given he doesn’t acknowledge  he was even there.


----------



## Combustible (Jan 31, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Well he can hardly argue that he was unaware of the circumstances given he doesn’t acknowledge  he was even there.


Presumably that's another reason for him to avoid going to trial. Even if he is able to mount a successful defense it would presumably require him to admit more than he has done so far. At the very least he surely cannot maintain that the photo of them together is fake.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 31, 2022)

teuchter said:


> That seems one of the areas where things are not very clear.


He sought to deny that area of the allegation by saying Epstein wasn’t really his friend, he was just Maxwell’s “plus one”.     That no longer puts the distance between him and the trafficking he thought it did.

Not to mention staying at Epstein’s house in order to be honourable and because it was convenient.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 31, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> I think he'd settle in a heartbeat given the option.
> 
> And it would most certainly be forgotten, particularly among the people that he mixes with. It would be said that he was never found guilty and settled in order to end the whole episode. If he's found 'guilty' by a jury, _then _he may be cut adrift by elements of his social circle, but otherwise he'll be swanning around with them again within a couple of years.


yeh but perhaps not in the surroundings he'd enjoy


Spoiler


----------



## TopCat (Jan 31, 2022)

justin credible said:


> There is also the issue of the fact that many victims of sex trafficking do not know that they are trafficked.  Many perceive their traffickers as their friends.  Many victims recruit other females (or in some cases males) to sex trafficking networks for various reasons.  Those reasons can be on a continuum of motivations, with at one end the chance to make money and to please the trafficker (who may be perceived as a friend or lover) and at the other end there may be a genuine belief that the vulnerable person being recruited is being helped to better themselves, pay off debts or some other reason.
> 
> Most recruiting of victims happens somewhere in the middle of the continuum and significant cognitive dissonance is involved.  If we consider this in a nuanced way then it is entirely possible that Prince Andrew could have had what he had every reasons to believe was consensual sexual activity with a young woman who was trafficked but who did not realise that she was trafficked.  She may have acted as though she was consenting but later come to believe that she was under duress.
> 
> ...


Summary. You cunt, fuck off.


----------



## existentialist (Jan 31, 2022)

justin credible said:


> why ill timed?
> 
> He makes a good point, yes she can't just rock up and give evidence but it is curious that a) she wasn't called to give evidence and b) given that she is no stranger to making her voice heard in the media she did not kick up a fuss about not being called.  I would have done in her position as would anyone I would have thought


I find this second-guessing of the mindset of someone who may well have been trafficked and abused really very distasteful indeed. Given that you appear to be speaking as a victim of some sort yourself, I'd have hoped for a little more empathy.


----------



## belboid (Feb 2, 2022)

Interesting claim in the Eye as to why TAFKAP is going for a trial rather than settling as (apparently) all the family want him too.  He thinks that once he has been found to be pure as snow, he’ll get all his old titles back and can wear those navy badges again.  The fuckwit.


----------



## T & P (Feb 2, 2022)

Which can be summarised as 'because as well as an arrogant prick, he's as thick as pigshit'.


----------



## equationgirl (Feb 2, 2022)

Oh dear. How sad. Never mind.

Is he still getting civil list money?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Feb 2, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> People will think he did it regardless of the outcome of any court case. He's clutching at straws in a hope to limit the, already massive, damage to his reputation and to be able to cast an element of doubt on his guilt that he can reference in his future life. "I was never convicted, therefore I didn't do it". And there'd be plenty of people who'd go along with that. Also, by indicating he's prepared to go all the way in court, Giuffre's side are more likely to settle eventually.


It worked for Michael Jackson, more than once. You don't have to everyone on your side, lots will do.


----------



## bluescreen (Feb 2, 2022)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> It worked for Michael Jackson, more than once. You don't have to everyone on your side, lots will do.


I reckon Michael Jackson still has quite a few more fans than Windsor ever had.


----------



## tim (Feb 2, 2022)

MickiQ said:


> On that note apparently HWCS doesn't have much in the way of spare dosh either, it might be difficult for him to offer a generous out of court settlement if there is no guarantee that his Mum/Bro/British Taxpayer will sub him.


Our Head of State has substantial "private" reserves salted away a few million spent to save a favourite son could easily be found


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Feb 2, 2022)

teuchter said:


> I think folks should pay attention to the points that justin credible is making.


Fuck off you n aw


----------



## Duncan2 (Feb 2, 2022)

If he does settle he will have to hand over many millions to Giuffre.Not sure there's going to be much room left thereafter for talk of any "presumption of innocence"


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Feb 2, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> I reckon Michael Jackson still has quite a few more fans than Windsor ever had.


And yet he was far, far worse.


----------



## TopCat (Feb 2, 2022)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> And yet he was far, far worse.


Are you sure?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Feb 2, 2022)

TopCat said:


> Are you sure?


Yeah.


----------



## TopCat (Feb 2, 2022)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Yeah.


What makes you sure?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Feb 2, 2022)

He named 2 of his kids Prince.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Feb 2, 2022)

TopCat said:


> What makes you sure?


I believe his accusers, and worked forwards from there.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 2, 2022)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> It worked for Michael Jackson, more than once. You don't have to everyone on your side, lots will do.


Even some


----------



## 1927 (Feb 2, 2022)

TopCat said:


> Are you sure?


Its not in doubt surely.


----------



## MickiQ (Feb 3, 2022)

tim said:


> Our Head of State has substantial "private" reserves salted away a few million spent to save a favourite son could easily be found


She's got hundreds of millions, I'm sure she can bail HWCS out. The question is whether she will. Whilst she is his mum after all, Brenda and her advisors may very well care more about how this reflects on the Royal Brood as a whole rather than bailing out HWCS. The nightmare scenario for him which may very well have him waking up in a cold non-sweat is the possibility that Brenda pops her clogs pre-trial. I don't think his brother will be anywhere near as sympathetic.


----------



## TopCat (Feb 3, 2022)

MickiQ said:


> She's got hundreds of millions, I'm sure she can bail HWCS out. The question is whether she will. Whilst she is his mum after all, Brenda and her advisors may very well care more about how this reflects on the Royal Brood as a whole rather than bailing out HWCS. The nightmare scenario for him which may very well have him waking up in a cold non-sweat is the possibility that Brenda pops her clogs pre-trial. I don't think his brother will be anywhere near as sympathetic.


History shows us no act is too low or venal for the royal family to not consider doing it to prop up their shabby institution.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Feb 3, 2022)

They will protect themselves first however will do all they can for those in the club.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 4, 2022)

New Royal portrait:


----------



## seeformiles (Feb 5, 2022)

Prince Andrew to give evidence in deposition in March
					

The Duke of York will face a deposition in London as part of the civil sexual assault case against him.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## tim (Feb 5, 2022)

seeformiles said:


> Prince Andrew to give evidence in deposition in March
> 
> 
> The Duke of York will face a deposition in London as part of the civil sexual assault case against him.
> ...


In an ideal world they'd depose his mum too


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 5, 2022)

tim said:


> In an ideal world they'd depose his mum too


the americans can't do everything, some things we have to do for ourselves


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Feb 6, 2022)

justin credible said:


> Also there are many, many things about the Epstein cult / abuse pyramid that I do not know about
> I am not claiming to know everything of course, just expressing curiosity about many things that, certainly amongst activists against the Qanon and anti-vaxx debunking communities have generated immense curiosity
> 
> All I have time for right now


Ah, right, someone who hangs out in the conspiracy corners of the internet. Definitely credible.


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Feb 6, 2022)

justin credible said:


> it really depends upon which survivor you give more credence to
> 
> According to Ms Andriano, Ms Giuffre didn’t appear upset over her claim she slept with Andrew.
> 
> ...


So someone groomed into sexual servitude normalises that kind of behaviour, because she's been groomed to go along with and participate in it, because that's how grooming works... who then achieves some kind of seniority due to a twisted kind of length of service and experience of being abused scenario, and who then, in turn, allegedly recruits and grooms others.

If Guiffre did go onto recruit and groom others, perpetuating a cycle of abuse, she's still a victim/survivor of trafficking and sexual abuse. The original grooming and abuse and trafficking she fell victim too wouldn't be negated by what occurred later. In fact it's arguable that that was part of and an extension of the original abuse and grooming. All things being equal, would she have recruited and groomed others, as alleged, if she hadn't been recruited and groomed by Epstein and Maxwell and subjected to the same herself in the first instance?


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Feb 6, 2022)

justin credible said:


> Perhaps I worded my post badly. Am running late.
> The thing is that VG has been included in various documentaries and news articles about the Epstein / Maxwell / Prince Andrew case
> In some she is seen standing alongside other survivors presenting a united front against abusers
> However things are complex.  A very credible survivor has made very serious allegations about VG.  Not all Epstein survivors view VG in the same way
> ...


You're not doing your arguments any favours by mentioning QAnon.


----------



## Raheem (Feb 6, 2022)

You're also not doing Qanon any favours by mentioning them in your arguments.


----------



## tim (Feb 6, 2022)

AnnO'Neemus said:


> You're not doing your arguments any favours by mentioning QAnon.


QAnon are not being done any favours by being mentioned by justin credible


----------



## equationgirl (Feb 6, 2022)

tim said:


> QAnon are not being done any favours by being mentioned by justin credible


That's not very kind.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 7, 2022)

andrew and fergie captions pls


----------



## danski (Feb 7, 2022)

“Do you think this one can dig you any deeper, Andy?”


----------



## DaveCinzano (Feb 7, 2022)

danski said:


> “Do you think this one can dig you any deeper, Andy?”


'No sweat'


----------



## Raheem (Feb 7, 2022)

"I don't understand why they're shouting that, Andrew. It's yellow, not gold."


----------



## LDC (Feb 7, 2022)

"Are you absolutely sure this is the best place to hide the bodies?"


----------



## surreybrowncap (Feb 7, 2022)

“Some sort of pizza restaurant to be built here apparently….”


----------



## krtek a houby (Feb 7, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 309122
> andrew and fergie captions pls



"And this is where one's reputation shall be buried"


----------



## JimW (Feb 7, 2022)

When I said "back, ho" Andrew, I was telling you to stay away from me.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 7, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 309122
> andrew and fergie captions pls


Parasites.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Feb 7, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> Parasites.


That's just metadata


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 7, 2022)

DaveCinzano said:


> That's just metadata


Parasites and a digger.


----------



## MickiQ (Feb 7, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> Parasites and a digger.


I didn't get post #7614 until you posted this


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 11, 2022)

Physio claims Andrew was 'creepiest massage client and asked X-rated questions'
					

Massage therapist Emma Gruenbaum claims she had six sessions with Prince Andrew in 2005 and he would always try to "overstep the line", including asking her inappropriate questions



					www.mirror.co.uk
				




A massage therapist who regularly treated Prince Andrew in his bedroom claims he was a "constant sex pest". 

Emma Gruenbaum, 50, said the Duke of York would often ask about her love life and tried to hug her at the end of sessions, held in Royal Lodge, Windsor Great Park.

She claimed she swore at the Queen's second son, 61, after he made a comment about her bum and after another remark told him: "It’s none of your f***ing business."


----------



## friedaweed (Feb 11, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Physio claims Andrew was 'creepiest massage client and asked X-rated questions'
> 
> 
> Massage therapist Emma Gruenbaum claims she had six sessions with Prince Andrew in 2005 and he would always try to "overstep the line", including asking her inappropriate questions
> ...





> Ms Gruenbaum was allegedly told "not to make a fuss" before she heard Andrew say behind her: "Hey nice a**. Do you take it up the a*?"


With chat up lines like that I bet Royston Vasey's getting worried about competition for his Blackpool residency this year.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 11, 2022)

friedaweed said:


> With chat up lines like that I bet Royston Vasey's getting worried about competition for his Blackpool residency this year.




He's gonna get torn to fucking shreds by Boies


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 11, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> He's gonna get torn to fucking shreds by Boies


hail hail the boies are here


----------



## Wilf (Feb 11, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Physio claims Andrew was 'creepiest massage client and asked X-rated questions'
> 
> 
> Massage therapist Emma Gruenbaum claims she had six sessions with Prince Andrew in 2005 and he would always try to "overstep the line", including asking her inappropriate questions
> ...


Every single word of that rings true, particularly about him insisting on being in the nip. Making a massage into some kind of exploitative turn on is also straight out out of the epstein school of noncery.  It's, literally learned behaviour from that creep.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 11, 2022)

I've no idea where windsor and his lawyer's were up to in 'brazen it out and go to court v settle the case', but this must tip the balance a bit further towards settle.  'Exhibiting a pattern of behaviour' is a phrase that comes to mind, or simply another event he won't want recounting in court.


----------



## friedaweed (Feb 11, 2022)

Wilf said:


> I've no idea where windsor and his lawyer's were up to in 'brazen it out and go to court v settle the case', but this must tip the balance a bit further towards settle.  'Exhibiting a pattern of behaviour' is a phrase that comes to mind, or simply another event he won't want recounting in court.


I don't think VG's up for letting him off the hook by settling and good for her.

Seems there's another masseuse in the fail now linking Randy Andy and Maxwell to naked massages and rompy pompy yacht invites.

Makes you wonder how many other might come forward.









						Ghislaine Maxwell introduced masseuse to Prince Andrew
					

EXCLUSIVE: Masseuse Monique Giannelloni told MailOnline that she massaged Prince Andrew in June 2000 after working with Ghislaine Maxwell on two occasions at her London home.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




'He was naked throughout the massage but always remained on his front.' fucking the hole in his teddy.


----------



## circleline (Feb 13, 2022)

Prince Andy looking very sweaty in DM photos here:









						Ghislaine Maxwell once 'described as Prince Andrew's ex-girlfriend'
					

Ghislaine Maxwell was once described as Prince Andrew's 'ex-girlfriend' during a private tour of Buckingham Palace the Duke gave to VIPs including former US President Bill Clinton.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## skyscraper101 (Feb 15, 2022)

He's just settled apparently









						Prince Andrew Settles Sexual Abuse Lawsuit With Virginia Giuffre
					

Financial terms of the settlement, which was announced in a federal court filing in Manhattan on Tuesday, were not revealed.




					www.nytimes.com


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Feb 15, 2022)

What?!?!?!?!?


----------



## kabbes (Feb 15, 2022)

.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Feb 15, 2022)

Blimey!



> Prince Andrew, the disgraced second son of Queen Elizabeth II, has settled a lawsuit brought by Virginia Giuffre, a woman who had accused him of raping her when she was a teenage victim of Andrew’s friend, the notorious sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, according to a new court filing in Manhattan on Tuesday.
> 
> The amount that Andrew, 61, will pay Ms. Giuffre is confidential, the parties said in a joint statement attached to the filing.
> 
> ...











						Prince Andrew Settles Sexual Abuse Lawsuit With Virginia Giuffre
					

Financial terms of the settlement, which was announced in a federal court filing in Manhattan on Tuesday, were not revealed.




					www.nytimes.com


----------



## steveseagull (Feb 15, 2022)

Does that mean he now officially a nonce?


----------



## ruffneck23 (Feb 15, 2022)

Nothing shows innocence like settling of court.

Dirty wanker.


----------



## danski (Feb 15, 2022)

(as we all knew) you don’t pay to shut someone up if they have nothing to say. 

Guilty!


----------



## ruffneck23 (Feb 15, 2022)

steveseagull said:


> Does that mean he now officially a nonce?


Prince nonce to you ( and I )


----------



## brogdale (Feb 15, 2022)

Good for the victim, I guess...but kind of disappointing for spectators?


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 15, 2022)

danski said:


> (as we all knew) you don’t pay to shut someone up if they have nothing to say.
> 
> Guilty!


Exactly.  I’m glad the victim gets a pay out though.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Feb 15, 2022)

brogdale said:


> Good for the victim, I guess...but kind of disappointing for spectators?



Good in one sense - she gets the money. But her claims against him won't be vindicated by a court of law.


----------



## bluescreen (Feb 15, 2022)

The settlement is an Andyperspirant*

a nonce word.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 15, 2022)




----------



## 1927 (Feb 15, 2022)

Wow! Just wow. There’s no coming back from this surely?


----------



## andysays (Feb 15, 2022)

cupid_stunt said:


> Blimey!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I suspect that this is the crucial bit



> The deal comes just weeks before Andrew was scheduled to sit for a deposition, in which he would have been questioned under oath by Ms. Giuffre’s lawyers



Someone has finally convinced him that was likely to go about as well as his now infamous TV interview.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 15, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


>



_...supporting the fight against the evils of sex trafficking..._

yeah right yer fucking nonce


----------



## souljacker (Feb 15, 2022)

Off to his Aunties old place in Mustique then I reckon, never to be seen or heard again. I suspect the Queen has put her hand in her pocket though as he's broke and she doesn't want anything to cloud her big year.


----------



## Sue (Feb 15, 2022)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Good in one sense - she gets the money. But her claims against him won't be vindicated by a court of law.


Him settling feels much like vindication. And it means she won't have to give evidence in court which is surely a good thing. (Imagine being the victim of sexual exploitation and trafficking and then being questioned in minute detail about that exploitation and having your life and character dragged through the mud.)


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 15, 2022)

No public admittance of any guilt. It may look bad still, but I call that a result for sweaty one. Shame he was never deposed. The amount paid no doubt will reflect that he avoided being deposed.


----------



## eatmorecheese (Feb 15, 2022)

I'm glad for VG's sake, tbh. A strong woman who took her quest a very long way. The Sweatless Creep will forever be known as such. Fuck him.


----------



## Duncan2 (Feb 15, 2022)

Well-I for one would  quite like to know just how much of the folding stuff Andrew had to hand over to Giuffre to get off the hook.Strictly speaking its none of my business of course.


----------



## MickiQ (Feb 15, 2022)

What ?? Is this another fucking distraction to get Boris off the hook? Just how much dirt does he have on people?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 15, 2022)

littlebabyjesus said:


> No public admittance of any guilt. It may look bad still, but I call that a result for sweaty one. Shame he was never deposed. The amount paid no doubt will reflect that he avoided being deposed.


Bollocks is it a result for andrew. It's a very long way from his 'i will prove my innocence', he has been weighed and found wanting in the court of public opinion. He's lost far far more than he's won here.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 15, 2022)

Duncan2 said:


> Well-I for one would  quite like to know just how much of the folding stuff Andrew had to hand over to Giuffre to get off the hook.Strictly speaking its none of my business of course.


$2,000,000 is my guess, quite possibly more


----------



## Teaboy (Feb 15, 2022)

This was always the most likely outcome, its amazing that it got this far and the longer it dragged on the more damaging it was to him.

The court case looked like it could get really nasty so at least that's avoided now.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 15, 2022)

littlebabyjesus said:


> No public admittance of any guilt. It may look bad still, but I call that a result for sweaty one. Shame he was never deposed. The amount paid no doubt will reflect that he avoided being deposed.


He doesn’t get a finding against him but he has very loudly failed to try to clear his name. The nonce.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 15, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> He doesn’t get a finding against him but he has very loudly failed to try to clear his name. The nonce.


Yeh noncey mcnonceface has been drummed out of decent society


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 15, 2022)

Sweaty nonce.


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Feb 15, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


>



That statement, admitting that Virginia Giuffre was a victim, and the nonce donating money to a victim's charity, pretty much says that he admits he's guilty, without officially admitting he's guilty.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 15, 2022)

ElizabethofYork said:


> That statement, admitting that Virginia Giuffre was a victim, and the nonce donating money to a victim's charity, pretty much says that he admits he's guilty, without officially admitting he's guilty.


It does.


----------



## Teaboy (Feb 15, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> Bollocks is it a result for andrew. It's a very long way from his 'i will prove my innocence', he has been weighed and found wanting in the court of public opinion. He's lost far far more than he's won here.



I think lbj meant from the position he got himself into now.  This probably was the best result he could hope for after the mess he's made of everything.  Clearly settling earlier was the right move* but he was too arrogant and obnoxious to countenance such a move.

* Well, apart from the obvious.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 15, 2022)

ElizabethofYork said:


> That statement, admitting that Virginia Giuffre was a victim, and the nonce donating money to a victim's charity, pretty much says that he admits he's guilty, without officially admitting he's guilty.


Yup. He’s admitting that when he maligned her as a liar he was lying.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 15, 2022)

Teaboy said:


> I think lbj meant from the position he got himself into now.  This probably was the best result he could hope for after the mess he's made of everything.  Clearly settling earlier was the right move* but he was too arrogant and obnoxious to countenance such a move.
> 
> * Well, apart from the obvious.


It's in a way worse for him than if he'd been deposed as anyone can say I reckon he did X or y and he can't comment. He can't sue anyone for libel - you can say what you will about him.


----------



## two sheds (Feb 15, 2022)

Yes strange - I thought he'd asked for the original photo of them together and she said today that she didn't have it any more.


----------



## Duncan2 (Feb 15, 2022)

I expect Maitlis will invite him back on Newsnight so as not to deny him the opportunity to correct any misunderstandings that may have arisen as a result of the answers he gave her on the previous occasion.


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 15, 2022)

He will probably be found face down in some shitty tributary off the backstreets of Bangkok one night.


----------



## Duncan2 (Feb 15, 2022)

He is actually going to have to flee if approached by anyone who so much as looks like he might work for a news outlet.


----------



## bluescreen (Feb 15, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> View attachment 310166
> 
> 
> Sweaty nonce.


He 'never intended to' but that's exactly what his lawyers did.


----------



## MrCurry (Feb 15, 2022)

I bet that was expensive!


----------



## JimW (Feb 15, 2022)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Good in one sense


Nonce sense?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 15, 2022)

Teaboy said:


> I think lbj meant from the position he got himself into now.  This probably was the best result he could hope for after the mess he's made of everything.  Clearly settling earlier was the right move* but he was too arrogant and obnoxious to countenance such a move.
> 
> * Well, apart from the obvious.


yes, that is what I meant. Avoiding a deposition and an explicit admission of wrongdoing, however much it has cost somebody. It could have been far worse for him.


----------



## existentialist (Feb 15, 2022)

MrCurry said:


> I bet that was expensive!


We will probably never know the price, he personally, pays, given that I imagine it's his mum who's bailed him out. I imagine that came with a *lot* of strings.


----------



## redcogs (Feb 15, 2022)

Nonce pays for his sex abusing habit using our fucking money.  Its all meaningless to these arrogant  chinless types.  outrageous.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Feb 15, 2022)

There's still time for him to have his own little Mullaghmore moment.


----------



## elbows (Feb 15, 2022)

MickiQ said:


> What ?? Is this another fucking distraction to get Boris off the hook? Just how much dirt does he have on people?


I know it will surprise people that previously had to listen to no end of shit about how he intended to fight to clear his name in court, but this outcome was always reasonably likely, especially once they failed to have the case thrown out at an earlier stage.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Feb 15, 2022)

An honourable man


----------



## tim (Feb 15, 2022)

1927 said:


> Wow! Just wow. There’s no coming back from this surely?


Don't be so naive!


----------



## RainbowTown (Feb 15, 2022)

Bought his way out of a trial.
Paid a huge sum of money to a person he said he didn't know or ever meet.
Not a word of contrition or apology.

Just crawl back beneath that rock you repugnant piece of trash.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 15, 2022)

Sprocket. said:


> He will probably be found face down in some shitty tributary off the backstreets of Bangkok one night.


Draped over the bins at the back of a pizza express


----------



## Thora (Feb 15, 2022)

Best outcome for her.  Everyone knows he's guilty and she doesn't have to go through being torn apart in court.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 15, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> He 'never intended to' but that's exactly what his lawyers did.












						Prince Andrew fails in bid for judge to consider ‘money-hungry sex kitten’ report
					

New York judge describes submission of newspaper clippings and accuser's The Billionaire’s Playboy Club manuscript as 'public relations'




					headtopics.com


----------



## seeformiles (Feb 15, 2022)

How dare he spoil our much anticipated schadenfreude! I had my deckchair re-covered and the popcorn was ready to go 😞


----------



## bemused (Feb 15, 2022)

Not surprised, always thought they'd settle.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Feb 15, 2022)

It couldn't possibly overshadow the Jubilee. Money perhaps came from that pot. So we're paying for it.
Wonder if any other accusations surface now.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Feb 15, 2022)

Settles for £7.5M according to the Mail. That might include costs.









						Prince Andrew reaches 'settlement in principle' with Virginia Giuffre
					

Prince Andrew has settled the sexual abuse lawsuit with Virginia Giuffre after he agreed an undisclosed deal said to be worth £7.5million with his accuser without admitting her accusations.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## cupid_stunt (Feb 15, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Settles for £7.5M according to the Mail. That might include costs.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I'll take that with a pinch of salt, the Mail is hardly a reliable source.


----------



## Athos (Feb 15, 2022)

Athos said:


> I think they're preparing the ground.  If I had to guess, I'd say it'll be a confidential settlement (for a hefty sum), without a formal admission of liability.
> 
> It'll be enough for her supporters to spin it as an effective admission, and his to spin it as no finding against him, and a pragmatic decision merely to put all this behind him.



And so it came to pass.


----------



## bemused (Feb 15, 2022)

I always suspected he was going to settle, a trial would have been too much tabloid fodder to deal with.


----------



## Athos (Feb 15, 2022)

bemused said:


> I always suspected he was going to settle, a trial would have been too much tabloid fodder to deal with.


Yeah, especially since its not his money. The only thing that would have got in the way would've been if she'd refused to do so.  But I guess it's hard to turn down the sort of sums they're probably looking at.


----------



## UrbaneFox (Feb 15, 2022)

andysays said:


> I suspect that this is the crucial bit
> 
> 
> 
> Someone has finally convinced him that was likely to go about as well as his now infamous TV interview.


I was really looking forward to that. 

How cheated I feel.


----------



## UrbaneFox (Feb 15, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> Draped over the bins at the back of a pizza express


Unconscious, slumped over the bar at Tramp.


----------



## Dom Traynor (Feb 15, 2022)

Good. This is a good result for the victim. I would imagine that any figures being bandied about will include legal costs and the amount he has agreed to pass on to charity, with the victim get a small proportion than it may appear. 

A settlement absolutely isn't an admission of guilt in the type of law I deal with, I assume it's the same here - but in my experience the accused settles to avoid the financial and reputational cost of continuing to fight, but in the court of public opinion he will be seen as guilty.


----------



## philosophical (Feb 15, 2022)

Johnson wants to settle out of court with the nation for partygate.


----------



## Part 2 (Feb 15, 2022)

Channel 4 news saying as much as £10million.

If her charity is in the US the donation figure will be public record.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 15, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> I think he'd settle in a heartbeat given the option.
> 
> And it would most certainly be forgotten, particularly among the people that he mixes with. It would be said that he was never found guilty and settled in order to end the whole episode. If he's found 'guilty' by a jury, _then _he may be cut adrift by elements of his social circle, but otherwise he'll be swanning around with them again within a couple of years.



And so it came to pass.


----------



## andysays (Feb 15, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> And so it came to pass.


I think it's a bit early to claim this bit is correct.



> And it would most certainly be forgotten, particularly among the people that he mixes with. It would be said that he was never found guilty and settled in order to end the whole episode. If he's found 'guilty' by a jury, _then _he may be cut adrift by elements of his social circle, but otherwise he'll be swanning around with them again within a couple of years.



It may perhaps turn out that way, though TBH I doubt it.

He was described today in the Telegraph as "the disgraced second son of Queen Elizabeth II", and that disgrace will stick to him for a good while yet.


----------



## MickiQ (Feb 15, 2022)

seeformiles said:


> How dare he spoil our much anticipated schadenfreude! I had my deckchair re-covered and the popcorn was ready to go 😞


You speak for us all

This is not a good result for His (Non)Sweatiness, about the only benefit I can see for him is that he can now travel freely to various foreign climes with no fear he will get his collar felt at the airport.
He's escaped being shown as a liar in court but since pretty much the entire world now thinks he is that's not really an achievement. He will probably start showing his face at royal functions again but much of his life before was glad handing and I can't see all that many companies and charities being wild about having their name associated with his.
The place I was working for 2 or 3 years ago when all this started had a big sign in Reception saying this building was opened by HRH Prince Andrew, it was discreetly taken down at some point and I can't see it going back up.
I was really looking forward to the trial though greatly disappointed but is probably the best for Giuffre though.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 15, 2022)

andysays said:


> He was described today in the Telegraph as "the disgraced second son of Queen Elizabeth II", and that disgrace will stick to him for a good while yet.



I disagree. All his toff mates are probably already breathing sighs of relief and declaring "he was never found guilty". He won't be getting all his royal schizzle back but I reckon he'll be living a perfectly normal life of riley in 2 or 3 years.


----------



## T & P (Feb 15, 2022)

I might try to find Andrew’s BBC interview and watch it again tonight, just for the lulz. More so as it would have been fundamental in killing off any chance he had of winning trial.


----------



## bluescreen (Feb 15, 2022)

T & P said:


> I might try to find Andrew’s BBC interview and watch it again tonight, just for the lulz. More so as it would have been fundamental in killing off any chance he had of winning trial.


Here you go:








						Newsnight - Prince Andrew & the Epstein Scandal: The Newsnight Interview
					

The Duke of York speaks about his relationship with convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.




					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## UrbaneFox (Feb 15, 2022)

Has he sold the chalet in Switzerland, or is mummy paying?


----------



## ouirdeaux (Feb 15, 2022)

Am I the only one who feels disappointed by this outcome? He hasn't been shown up in court. Doesn't anyone remember Jordan Chandler? Michael Jackson shelled out $23 million out of court in 1994, and his fans apparently didn't think it was strange for someone to pay a sum like that if they weren't guilty.


----------



## killer b (Feb 15, 2022)

ouirdeaux said:


> Am I the only one who feels disappointed by this outcome? He hasn't been shown up in court. Doesn't anyone remember Jordan Chandler? Michael Jackson shelled out $23 million out of court in 1994, and his fans apparently didn't think it was strange for someone to pay a sum like that if they weren't guilty.


does prince andrew have any fans though? Jackson was a nonce, but he also created some of the most successful popular music of the 20th century. He has fans who're prepared to look past the noncing as a result. Prince Andrew does not.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 15, 2022)

MickiQ said:


> This is not a good result for His (Non)Sweatiness, about the only benefit I can see for him is that he can now travel freely to various foreign climes with no fear he will get his collar felt at the airport.




No he can't, the FBI still want a cosy chat with the despicable nonce for a start.


----------



## ouirdeaux (Feb 15, 2022)

killer b said:


> He has fans who're prepared to look past the noncing as a result. Prince Andrew does not.



He has sleazebag wealthy mates who will say that this proves she was a money-grubbing slag, and she was willing at the time, and it's all nonsense. How many of them have done similar things, and excused it in their own heads?

Non-sleazebags, assuming there are any, can think that it was a shame that Andrew got mixed up with bad people, but isn't it noble of him to donate to good causes and to spare both the royals and that poor girl, abused by so many nonAndrews, the indignity of having to go to court.

There are Michael Jackson fans who even now believe he was innocent. I think you underestimate the capacity of people to believe what it suits them to believe, in the face of overwhelming evidence. Surely there are enough examples of this around.


----------



## killer b (Feb 15, 2022)

ouirdeaux said:


> He has sleazebag wealthy mates who will say that this proves she was a money-grubbing slag, and she was willing at the time, and it's all nonsense. How many of them have done similar things, and excused it in their own heads?
> 
> Non-sleazebags, assuming there are any, can think that it was a shame that Andrew got mixed up with bad people, but isn't it noble of him to donate to good causes and to spare both the royals and that poor girl, abused by so many nonAndrews, the indignity of having to go to court.
> 
> There are Michael Jackson fans who even now believe he was innocent. I think you underestimate the capacity of people to believe what it suits them to believe, in the face of overwhelming evidence. Surely there are enough examples of this around.


I'm sure there'll be people who believe he's innocent and she's a money grubbing slut - they're the same people who would have believed that whatever happened. It's not really about him, or about her, or about the result of a court case for them, it's about their own gross misogyny, and a civil conviction in an american court would not have changed their view one bit. It probably would have made them worse in fact, seeing as Giuffre would have been slandered through the courts for months. This is the best result for everyone really.


----------



## N_igma (Feb 15, 2022)

killer b said:


> does prince andrew have any fans though? Jackson was a nonce, but he also created some of the most successful popular music of the 20th century. He has fans who're prepared to look past the noncing as a result. Prince Andrew does not.


Unfortunately there’s plenty of loyalists in NI who still support him, as he is a member of their beloved Royal Family. ‘Innocent until proven guilty’ was their main point leading up to this and now it’s ‘she was only looking his money’. This is what we have to deal with on a daily basis here.


----------



## Duncan2 (Feb 15, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> No he can't, the FBI still want a cosy chat with the despicable nonce for a start.


Just imagine......


----------



## not-bono-ever (Feb 15, 2022)

Bollocks on Twitter referencing the tellygraf stating settlement north of £10 million


----------



## not-bono-ever (Feb 15, 2022)

ROFL


----------



## ruffneck23 (Feb 15, 2022)

I reckon he rocked up with 10 million dollars and said ' If you don't take this, then the stress will kill my Mum, and you will always be known as the girl who killed the queen.'

And she just thought 'fuck it' and vowed never to get a taxi in Paris.

I'm drunk though.


----------



## ouirdeaux (Feb 15, 2022)

ruffneck23 said:


> I'm drunk though.


In which case I'd advise you not to drive a taxi in Paris either.


----------



## clicker (Feb 15, 2022)

I reckon he's toast.


----------



## friedaweed (Feb 15, 2022)

Surprised by that. 
So now he's done exactly what his noncey mate Eppo did who was eventually convicted for being a peado. Are we likely to find him hanging in the tower as a finale? 



clicker said:


> I reckon he's toast.



French tunnel toast?


----------



## Wilf (Feb 15, 2022)

brogdale said:


> _...supporting the fight against the evils of sex trafficking..._
> 
> yeah right yer fucking nonce


Didn't know whether that bid was deeply offensive, staggeringly postmodern or just plain lol. I'll be interested to know what form his 'support' takes. I hope journos keep checking.


----------



## friedaweed (Feb 15, 2022)

Thora said:


> Best outcome for her.  Everyone knows he's guilty and she doesn't have to go through being torn apart in court.


I wholeheartedly agree with that on a point of principal but I think the premise for the settlement has probably been done because his legal team know he'd of been torn apart in court.


----------



## friedaweed (Feb 15, 2022)

On the beeb



> Anti-monarchy group Republic believes there remains “a lot of serious questions” after the Duke of York’s settlement of the civil sex assault claim against him.
> 
> Graham Smith, from the campaign group, said: “I’m pleased Virginia Giuffre has achieved a settlement in this case, but there remain a lot of serious questions to which the public deserve answers.”
> 
> ...



Where the money comes from might come out in the charity's accounts according to one commentator on the live feed. He can't have that much in his piggy bank without Mummy making it ching ching.


----------



## bluescreen (Feb 15, 2022)

friedaweed said:


> On the beeb
> 
> 
> 
> Where the money comes from might come out in the charity's accounts according to one commentator on the live feed. He can't have that much in his piggy bank without Mummy making it ching ching.


Well, it's not over until he actually pays up...


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Feb 15, 2022)

cupid_stunt said:


> I'll take that with a pinch of salt, the Mail is hardly a reliable source.


They probably have more inroads to the Establishment than other rags. They're sensationalist but not necessarily unreliable when it comes to the wealthy.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Feb 15, 2022)

N_igma said:


> Unfortunately there’s plenty of loyalists in NI who still support him, as he is a member of their beloved Royal Family. ‘Innocent until proven guilty’ was their main point leading up to this and now it’s ‘she was only looking his money’. This is what we have to deal with on a daily basis here.


And here, tbf.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 15, 2022)

I don't suppose FOI requests work on her Majesty's accounts do they. She probably counts as a private citizen for the purposes of accountability.


----------



## Calamity1971 (Feb 15, 2022)

UrbaneFox said:


> Unconscious, slumped over the bar at Tramp.


He'd have to find out where it is first.


----------



## bluescreen (Feb 15, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Settles for £7.5M according to the Mail. That might include costs.
> 
> 
> 
> ...





> US/UK legal expert quoted by the Graun reckons possibly more:
> 
> “You can anticipate this would be probably in excess of £10m, even £20m perhaps. I don’t know what it is for a fact but as someone who does these agreements all the time it could easily be up there. And frankly it could be far higher.”












						Why Andrew had to settle with Virginia Giuffre: lawyers say he had little choice
					

Agreeing a payout estimated to be at least $10m spares the duke from the risk of a poor performance on the witness stand




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Yossarian (Feb 15, 2022)

ouirdeaux said:


> Am I the only one who feels disappointed by this outcome?



I'm a little disappointed that we won't get to see a judge order him to be placed in some kind of heat chamber in front of the jury to determine the truth of his "can't sweat" claim, in a moment like the glove in the OJ Simpson trial.

"If sweat starts to ooze, this case the prince will lose."


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 15, 2022)

Speculation about the dough coming from the sale of the chalet; he bought that with a mortgage and cash his mummy gave him. Neither was sufficient to buy the place and he had to sell it to raise the last £6m to pay the French scuzbag he bought it from. So if it is £18m, less £6m, less mortgage, that don’t leave much. That’s before Fergie grabs a bit of bunce, it was ‘jointly owned’ after all…


----------



## friedaweed (Feb 15, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Speculation about the dough coming from the sale of the chalet; he bought that with a mortgage and cash his mummy gave him. Neither was sufficient to buy the place and he had to sell it to raise the last £6m to pay the French scuzbag he bought it from. So if it is £18m, less £6m, less mortgage, that don’t leave much.* That’s before Fergie grabs a bit of bunce*, it was ‘jointly owned’ after all…


Looking forward to seeing how she plays this out. I always thought she signed some sort of non disclosure to avoid a collision with a white fiat Uno anyway. 

"I never sensed any noncery in Andrew, I just set him up with a long mine of massages"


----------



## equationgirl (Feb 15, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> View attachment 310166
> 
> 
> Sweaty nonce.


That was the bit that stuck out to me. That's exactly what he's been doing for months the lying toad.

I'm sad he's settled as Boies would have absolutely shredded him. But I am glad Virginia Guiffre won't have to subject herself to a trial.

Clearly someone has told Andrew to sort this out and make it go away. Will be interesting to see if he hands back his Duke of York title or where he is exiled to.


----------



## friedaweed (Feb 15, 2022)

equationgirl said:


> That was the bit that stuck out to me. That's exactly what he's been for months the lying toad.
> 
> I'm sad he's settled as Boies would have absolutely shredded him. But I am glad Virginia Guiffre won't have to subject herself to a trial.
> 
> Clearly someone has told Andrew to sort this out and make it go away. Will be interesting to see if he hands back his Duke of York title or where he is exiled to.


Marched up to the top of the hill never to come down again hopefully.


----------



## AverageJoe (Feb 15, 2022)

Is it a bit tin foil hat to suggest that his lawyers got the people that he would have dropped into the shit if he was found guilty (I really didn't want to say fingered) to pay up the money? 

As in "if HRH goes down, you'll be next so pay up to buy her silence and keep your reputation in place."

I dont know how these things work but I can imagine there were probably a lot of people that HRH Nonce was acquaintances with that would have happily paid up to keep the heat from them based on the photos we know about.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 15, 2022)

AverageJoe said:


> Is it a bit tin foil hat to suggest that his lawyers got the people that he would have dropped into the shit if he was found guilty (I really didn't want to say fingered) to pay up the money?
> 
> As in "if HRH goes down, you'll be next so pay up to buy her silence and keep your reputation in place."
> 
> I dont know how these things work but I can imagine there were probably a lot of people that HRH Nonce was acquaintances with that would have happily paid up to keep the heat from them based on the photos we know about.




He’s no longer an HRH publicly.

And the people pushing him to end this were his ma and brar.


----------



## AverageJoe (Feb 15, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> He’s no longer an HRH publicly.
> 
> And the people pushing him to end this were his ma and brar.


I get that bit what I'm trying to elucidate is that when his lawyers realised he was on a hiding to nothing they contacted his phone book (Spacey, Clinton etc) and said "you need to stump up cos if HRH is done then you guys are next.

So almost blackmailing them to pay up so HRH takes the hit and they stay out the way.

Was just an idea to make me feel better about me paying part of the settlement via taxes.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 15, 2022)

AverageJoe said:


> I get that bit what I'm trying to elucidate is that when his lawyers realised he was on a hiding to nothing they contacted his phone book (Spacey, Clinton etc) and said "you need to stump up cos if HRH is done then you guys are next.
> 
> So almost blackmailing them to pay up so HRH takes the hit and they stay out the way.
> 
> Was just an idea to make me feel better about me paying part of the settlement via taxes.




Nah, mummy’s stumping up for this.


----------



## Athos (Feb 15, 2022)

AverageJoe said:


> I get that bit what I'm trying to elucidate is that when his lawyers realised he was on a hiding to nothing they contacted his phone book (Spacey, Clinton etc) and said "you need to stump up cos if HRH is done then you guys are next.
> 
> So almost blackmailing them to pay up so HRH takes the hit and they stay out the way.
> 
> Was just an idea to make me feel better about me paying part of the settlement via taxes.


Just not worth the aggro given his mum will give him our money to make it go away.  The money was never going to be an issue for him; it was just whether or not she was determined to have her day in court, on principle.


----------



## Dystopiary (Feb 15, 2022)

friedaweed said:


> ching ching.


Wasn't that the egg-laying panda?


----------



## friedaweed (Feb 15, 2022)

Dystopiary said:


> Wasn't that the egg-laying panda?


Wouldn't be surprised to hear he's been sniffing round the zoo too.


----------



## Raheem (Feb 15, 2022)

Dystopiary said:


> Wasn't that the egg-laying panda?


If I had an egg-laying panda, I'd call it Kerr Ching.


----------



## TopCat (Feb 15, 2022)

killer b said:


> does prince andrew have any fans though? Jackson was a nonce, but he also created some of the most successful popular music of the 20th century. He has fans who're prepared to look past the noncing as a result. Prince Andrew does not.


This will never go away.


----------



## killer b (Feb 15, 2022)

TopCat said:


> This will never go away.


reckon - maybe he'll be welcomed back to the homes of some of his grosser friends, but his life as a public figure is over.


----------



## Raheem (Feb 15, 2022)

He'll probably still be allowed to attend royal funerals dressed as Captain Birdseye.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Feb 15, 2022)

Raheem said:


> He'll probably still be allowed to attend royal funerals dressed as Captain Birdseye.


Vice Admiral Birdseye, shurely


----------



## RileyOBlimey (Feb 16, 2022)

“exceeds £12 million” according to the Torygraph.


----------



## Raheem (Feb 16, 2022)

RileyOBlimey said:


> “exceeds £12 million” according to the Torygraph.


But think of what they do for tourism.


----------



## pesh (Feb 16, 2022)

The Abbey Road zebra crossing probably does as much and it's never been accused of anything like this.


----------



## Raheem (Feb 16, 2022)

pesh said:


> The Abbey Road zebra crossing probably does as much and it's never been accused of anything like this.


It's not stupid enough to go on Newsnight.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Feb 16, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> They probably have more inroads to the Establishment than other rags. They're sensationalist but not necessarily unreliable when it comes to the wealthy.



The Mail link you provided quoted £7,5m, a few hours later they went to press with a front page claiming it's £10m, which shows they are just guessing, the same with other papers, the Express, Mirror, Sun, and Telegraph are all reporting £12m.


----------



## William of Walworth (Feb 16, 2022)

Depressingly in retrospect (and I've no real idea why!), over the past few weeks I've been slowly catching up with *the best part of the last 200 pages*!! of this thread   

I now know more about the royals in general and Andrew Windsor in particular, than I ever needed or wanted to know ..... </   at self!!>

Right, time to start catchiug up with the Scumbag Johnson mega-thread ....


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 16, 2022)

Raheem said:


> It's not stupid enough to go on Newsnight.




Accusations of upskirting.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Feb 16, 2022)

cupid_stunt said:


> The Mail link you provided quoted £7,5m, a few hours later they went to press with a front page claiming it's £10m, which shows they are just guessing, the same with other papers, the Express, Mirror, Sun, and Telegraph are all reporting £12m.



So you’re saying the Mail are no worse than other sources? Because you appeared to be suggesting otherwise.


----------



## tim (Feb 16, 2022)

not-bono-ever said:


> ROFL


Are there pictures of him and the Duke of York, too?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Feb 16, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> So you’re saying the Mail are no worse than other sources? Because you appeared to be suggesting otherwise.



On this issue, I take all the quoted figures with a pinch of salt, none of them know, beyond it's likely to be many millions.


----------



## Badgers (Feb 16, 2022)

Raheem said:


> But think of what they do for tourism.


They do little or nothing. 

Visitor numbers for Buckingham (council House) Palace vs Palace of Versailles 🙄


----------



## Fairweather (Feb 16, 2022)




----------



## platinumsage (Feb 16, 2022)

Badgers said:


> They do little or nothing.
> 
> Visitor numbers for Buckingham (council House) Palace vs Palace of Versailles 🙄



It's not all about entrance fees:


----------



## bluescreen (Feb 16, 2022)

You've got to laugh:


> Lady Victoria Hervey, who socialised with the Duke of York in the early 2000s, issued a message of support for Andrew.
> 
> She told the PA news agency: “I think Virginia’s team realised there was no substantial evidence in these accusations once the supposed original photo didn’t exist.
> 
> ...











						Prince Andrew settles sexual abuse lawsuit with Virginia Giuffre – as it happened
					

This blog is now closed.




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## bluescreen (Feb 16, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> You've got to laugh:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Hervey has her very own special Wikipedia entry, which contains such gems as:



> On 18 September 2007, she appeared on ITV's _Don't Call Me Stupid_ programme, where she was asked to learn about the Labour Party Movement with George Galloway."


and


> In 2003, Hervey attracted controversy after saying, "It's so bad being homeless in winter. They should go somewhere warm like the Caribbean where they can eat fresh fish all day."





> In January 2022 Hervey said in an interview that she felt that Ghislaine Maxwell had used her as "bait", to attract women to Jeffrey Epstein's parties.[14][11] She later suggested that a photo showing Prince Andrew with Virginia Giuffre had been faked with body doubles.


----------



## Flavour (Feb 16, 2022)

who the fuck is Lady Victoria Hervey lol


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 16, 2022)

Flavour said:


> who the fuck is Lady Victoria Hervey lol



Oxygen thief extraordinaire.


----------



## High Voltage (Feb 16, 2022)

Flavour said:


> who the fuck is Lady Victoria Hervey lol


Yet another entitled nobody


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 16, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> Hervey has her very own special Wikipedia entry, which contains such gems as:
> 
> 
> and


She is the very model of a modern Marie Antoinette


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 16, 2022)

Badgers said:


> They do little or nothing.
> 
> Visitor numbers for Buckingham (council House) Palace vs Palace of Versailles 🙄


Imagine the money that could be raised for the NHS selling parts of the royal family's bodies to royalists post-guillotining.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 16, 2022)

Flavour said:


> who the fuck is Lady Victoria Hervey lol



A painfully thick mega-posh bird, but she’s not saying anything that half the toffs in the world won’t be in a year or twos time, which is why nonce-face is going to slip back into a normal life.


----------



## Flavour (Feb 16, 2022)

"slip back into a normal life", spy? wouldn't have chosen that exact phrasing myself   unless you mean "normal" for him... though i doubt he'll be getting those navy titles back


----------



## Kevbad the Bad (Feb 16, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> A painfully thick mega-posh bird, but she’s not saying anything that half the toffs in the world won’t be in a year or twos time, which is why nonce-face is going to slip back into a normal life.


Rolf Harris is performing at sell-out gigs at the London Palladium too.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 16, 2022)

Kevbad the Bad said:


> Rolf Harris is performing at sell-out gigs at the London Palladium too.


With Gary glitter on backing vocals


----------



## MickiQ (Feb 16, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> No he can't, the FBI still want a cosy chat with the despicable nonce for a start.


Nice thought of course but I imagine that will just get dropped now, she was his only accuser and probably wouldn't be too interested in pursuing it. It would be a high profile investigation that would stir up at least some diplomatic flak and is not likely to go anywhere. We will probably see him in the background of royal family events (Captain Birdseye costume optional) but other than that, he will most likely be given a stipend and told to stay out of the limelight. Imagine family get togethers going to be a bit awkward from now on.


----------



## scalyboy (Feb 16, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> Imagine the money that could be raised for the NHS selling parts of the royal family's bodies to royalists post-guillotining.


That would be the public-spirited option, but the hungry penguins would surely prefer the frozen regal carcasses to be shipped down to the south Atlantic for their delectation. Maybe some sort of agreement could be reached, 50/50 split, down the middle?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 16, 2022)

scalyboy said:


> That would be the public-spirited option, but the hungry penguins would surely prefer the frozen regal carcasses to be shipped down to the south Atlantic for their delectation. Maybe some sort of agreement could be reached, 50/50 split, down the middle?


Let me tell you of the equestrian statue of Charles I in Trafalgar Square. It was made before the civil war and then sold as scrap to a cunning fellow, who sold bits of it to royalists as momentos of their dead hero and to parliamentarians as a souvenir of their great triumph. And when the monarchy was restored lo and behold the statue reappeared whole and made its concealer another nice sum of money


----------



## bluescreen (Feb 16, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> Let me tell you of the equestrian statue of Charles I in Trafalgar Square. It was made before the civil war and then sold as scrap to a cunning fellow, who sold bits of it to royalists as momentos of their dead hero and to parliamentarians as a souvenir of their great triumph. And when the monarchy was restored lo and behold the statue reappeared whole and made its concealer another nice sum of money


A Riveting story.


----------



## chandlerp (Feb 16, 2022)




----------



## rubbershoes (Feb 16, 2022)

Kevbad the Bad said:


> Rolf Harris is performing at sell-out gigs at the London Palladium too.



He was never posh and is still banged up iirc


----------



## eatmorecheese (Feb 16, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> You've got to laugh:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Lol, the final damning indictment


----------



## chandlerp (Feb 16, 2022)

Rolf's been out for ages.


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 16, 2022)

chandlerp said:


> Rolf's been out for ages.


No doubt living off his Stylophone royalties.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 16, 2022)

Kevbad the Bad said:


> Rolf Harris is performing at sell-out gigs at the London Palladium too.



Nope. RH was found guilty and did time. Andy’s mob will see this as his vindication because _they want to. _He’ll be back on the slopes in Verbier before you can say “no sweat”, and poncing up at Ascot and Henley in the next year or two.


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 16, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> Nope. RH was found guilty and did time. Andy’s mob will see this as his vilification because _they want to. _He’ll be back on the slopes in Verbier before you can say “no sweat”, and poncing up at Ascot and Henley in the next year or two.


When he really should spend the rest of his days like the man in an iron mask. Walled up in a Balmoral cellar.


----------



## friedaweed (Feb 16, 2022)

I think he'll retire somewhere quiet for a while in order to get the tabloid press off his back.


Pickman's model said:


> With* Gary glitter* on backing vocals


Once refused admission to Thailand as a threat to domestic morality. Maybe Andrew might struggle to get back on the slopes if his passport's marked Nonse


----------



## bemused (Feb 16, 2022)

Athos said:


> Yeah, especially since its not his money. The only thing that would have got in the way would've been if she'd refused to do so.  But I guess it's hard to turn down the sort of sums they're probably looking at.


The remedy she was seeking was cash, she's short-circuited the process which happens in most civil cases. She beat him without the bother and cost of a trial.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 16, 2022)

Once his ma's brown bread I can't see old sausage fingers being too kind to the sweaty nonce, he's already said he's going for a slimmed down monarchy, just the direct line of succession, so that's Andy and his twatty family out of the picture. I believe he does have a lifetime lease on Royal Lodge, but it's fairly public, rather than Balmoral or somewhere where he can't be seen or heard, nor can he see or hear folk shouting Nonce! at him either...


----------



## GarveyLives (Feb 16, 2022)

bemused said:


> I always suspected he was going to settle, a trial would have been too much tabloid fodder to deal with.





friedaweed said:


> I think he'll retire somewhere quiet for a while in order to get the tabloid press off his back ...



They are mmaking the most of it while they can:


----------



## bemused (Feb 16, 2022)

Just watch, they'll try to seek him back into public life after the Queen's big party is over. It's a rotten system run by rotten people.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Feb 16, 2022)

bemused said:


> Just watch, they'll try to seek him back into public life after the Queen's big party is over. It's a rotten system run by rotten people.



I very much doubt that, too much damage has been done.


----------



## bemused (Feb 16, 2022)

cupid_stunt said:


> I very much doubt that, too much damage has been done.


It'll happen. He'll sneak back in.


----------



## killer b (Feb 16, 2022)

bemused said:


> It'll happen. He'll sneak back in.


how are you imagining he will sneak back into a high profile public facing role in the royal family? which jobs will he be doing? who's going to want a sweaty nonce cutting the ribbon to open their new hospital wing? It's really not going to happen, because their only purpose is PR, and it isn't good PR to be associated with someone who's paid tens of millions of pounds to make a rape charge go away.


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 16, 2022)

bemused said:


> Just watch, they'll try to seek him back into public life after the Queen's big party is over. It's a rotten system run by rotten people.


Liked for a “rotten system run by rotten people”


----------



## bemused (Feb 16, 2022)

killer b said:


> how are you imagining he will sneak back into a high profile public facing role in the royal family? which jobs will he be doing? who's going to want a sweaty nonce cutting the ribbon to open their new hospital wing? It's really not going to happen, because their only purpose is PR, and it isn't good PR to be associated with someone who's paid tens of millions of pounds to make a rape charge go away.


Not sure they'll be high profile but he'll sneak into low-level roles - parks commissioner or something that fulfilled his immense entitlement.


----------



## killer b (Feb 16, 2022)

bemused said:


> Not sure they'll be high profile but he'll sneak into low-level roles - parks commissioner or something that fulfilled his immense entitlement.


But the only purpose for any organisation in having a royal involved with them is for publicity purposes - they don't do anything else. The parks commission won't want him. No-one will want him, because the only publicity he will bring with him will be bad.


----------



## rubbershoes (Feb 16, 2022)

Oh, the grand old Duke of York
He had ten million quid
He paid it out to someone he'd never met
Cos he's a sweaty nonce


It needs more work, I know.


----------



## MickiQ (Feb 16, 2022)

bemused said:


> Not sure they'll be high profile but he'll sneak into low-level roles - parks commissioner or something that fulfilled his immense entitlement.


Get him a pointy stick with a black bin bag, it'll be the first useful thing he's done since he left the RN. I doubt he would be all that interested in a 'job' that a) keeps him out of the public eye and b) requires him to do some actual  work even if it is just sat behind a desk and attending meetings. Entitled people like attention and praise and he isn't going to be all that welcome in roles where praise might be forthcoming. Doubt he will have to sign on though, I suspect whatever deal has been struck with Mum and Bro to bail his (non) sweaty ass out includes an income enough to keep him out of the public eye. I imagine Chucky would prefer not to be reminded of him.
Mrs Q was expressing her disappointment last night, she was kind of hoping that the Judge might order him to sit under sun lamps for a bit to test whether he does actually sweat.


----------



## MickiQ (Feb 16, 2022)

rubbershoes said:


> Oh, the grand old Duke of York
> He had ten million quid
> He paid it out to someone he'd never met
> Cos he's a sweaty nonce
> ...


but a good start


----------



## Athos (Feb 16, 2022)

bemused said:


> The remedy she was seeking was cash, she's short-circuited the process which happens in most civil cases. She beat him without the bother and cost of a trial.


To a point.  But I'm sure she'd have preferred a judicial finding against him as well as the cash.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 16, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> Nope. RH was found guilty and did time. Andy’s mob will see this as his vilification because _they want to. _He’ll be back on the slopes in Verbier before you can say “no sweat”, and poncing up at Ascot and Henley in the next year or two.


Yeah, can't see him being a 'working' (cough) royal again, but getting back to his privileged life sponging off the rich? Quite possible. imo that's why him avoiding making an explicit admission of guilt to anything other than misjudgement is important. Of course we can all see the truth (and this particular case is very likely only one of very many), but he has not admitted to anything and never will.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 16, 2022)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yeah, can't see him being a 'working' (cough) royal again, but getting back to his privileged life sponging off the rich? Quite possible. imo that's why him avoiding making an explicit admission of guilt to anything other than misjudgement is important.



Exactly. Among the people who want to turn a blind eye (and there are many; royalists, poshos, misogynists, etc), all that was necessary was for him not to be found guilty in court, or to admit to any wrongdoing. This can all be gradually swept under the carpet now.

And of course, I meant vindication, not vilification


----------



## Kaka Tim (Feb 16, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> Let me tell you of the equestrian statue of Charles I in Trafalgar Square. It was made before the civil war and then sold as scrap to a cunning fellow, who sold bits of it to royalists as momentos of their dead hero and to parliamentarians as a souvenir of their great triumph. And when the monarchy was restored lo and behold the statue reappeared whole and made its concealer another nice sum of money


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 16, 2022)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yeah, can't see him being a 'working' (cough) royal again, but getting back to his privileged life sponging off the rich? Quite possible. imo that's why him avoiding making an explicit admission of guilt to anything other than misjudgement is important. Of course we can all see the truth (and this particular case is very likely only one of very many), but he has not admitted to anything and never will.


When his own ma has stripped him of pretty much all his titles and the heir apparent wishes he'd curl up and die it's a fair bet that the things that formerly made him attractive to the ultra-rich have been largely chopped away from him.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 16, 2022)

Fuck, they can even spin this as him doing his duty if they're that way inclined. He _wanted_ to fight the case in court and expose the lies, but that would have spoiled the Queen's jubilee.


----------



## T & P (Feb 16, 2022)

Meanwhile, I see that Pizza Express Woking is still getting as favourable reviews nowadays as it was back in November 2019. Good to see a restaurant being able to mantain such excellent customer service and quality throughout 









						PIZZA EXPRESS, Woking - 65 Goldsworth Rd - Updated 2022 Restaurant Reviews, Menu, Prices & Restaurant Reviews - Food Delivery & Takeaway - Tripadvisor
					

Order takeaway and delivery at Pizza Express, Woking with Tripadvisor: See 269 unbiased reviews of Pizza Express, ranked #41 on Tripadvisor among 221 restaurants in Woking.




					www.tripadvisor.co.uk


----------



## Kaka Tim (Feb 16, 2022)

I reckon he might be pretty fucked financially once Chas takes over - you cant exactly trade on your name anymore when your name is "prince andrew the nonce" .  Suspect he might get stripped of the Duke of York title as well once his mum has gone.


----------



## friedaweed (Feb 16, 2022)

rubbershoes said:


> Oh, the grand old Duke of York
> He had ten million quid
> He paid it out to someone he'd never met
> Cos he's a sweaty nonce
> ...


I think it's got enough poetic magnificence as it stands .


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 16, 2022)

Kaka Tim said:


> I reckon he might be pretty fucked financially once Chas takes over - you cant exactly trade on your name anymore when your name is "prince andrew the nonce" .  Suspect he might get stripped of the Duke of York title as well once his mum has gone.


He should be happy if he doesn’t end up like Fredo Corleone after his mother dies.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 16, 2022)

rubbershoes said:


> Oh, the grand old Duke of York
> He had ten million quid
> He paid it out to someone he'd never met
> Because he fucked a kid


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 16, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> When his own ma has stripped him of pretty much all his titles and the heir apparent wishes he'd curl up and die it's a fair bet that the things that formerly made him attractive to the ultra-rich have been largely chopped away from him.




Exactly, kleptomaniac despots weren't shoving cash his way cos he's a nice guy, they were buying influence, now the sweatless slug has none left to sell.


----------



## surreybrowncap (Feb 16, 2022)

rubbershoes said:


> Oh, the grand old Duke of York``
> He had ten million quid
> He paid it out to someone he'd never met
> Cos he's a sweaty nonce
> ...


 Ode to Andrew’s Trousers 

_And when they were up, they were up
And when they were down, they were down 
So Mum will pay his 10 million quid
She’ll have to sell a crown_


----------



## Gromit (Feb 16, 2022)

The amount settled was undisclosed.
Media are saying 10mil to her and 2mil to her choosen charity...

... But the truth of the matter is no one knows.

It could have been £10k and a promise mum won't "off you" like she did Princess Di.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 16, 2022)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Fuck, they can even spin this as him doing his duty if they're that way inclined. He _wanted_ to fight the case in court and expose the lies, but that would have spoiled the Queen's jubilee.


it wouldn't have spoiled the queen's jubilee if he was vindicated and vg shown as a gold-digging good-for-nothing, would it? as matters are, he's ruined the queen's jubilee by proving certainly on the balance of probabilities he's a nonce and pretty much beyond a reasonable doubt that he's a wrong un. because rather than putting this story to bed, as it were, andrew has given it legs to run and run all year. if not longer. what will he do when woman #2 or #3 comes out seeking restitution?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 16, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Exactly, kleptomaniac despots weren't shoving cash his way cos he's a nice guy, they were buying influence, now the sweatless slug has none left to sell.


and only the entitled thickies like lady v.h. would want anything to do with him.


----------



## bluescreen (Feb 16, 2022)

I reckon legal fees on both sides will be several ££m and he'll be paying both.


----------



## Santino (Feb 16, 2022)

rubbershoes said:


> Oh, the grand old Duke of York
> He had ten million quid
> He paid it out to someone he'd never met
> Cos he's a sweaty nonce
> ...


'For something he never did'


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 16, 2022)

Sign the Petition
					

Who is paying for Prince Andrew's settlement?




					actionstorm.org


----------



## izz (Feb 16, 2022)

MickiQ said:


> Nice thought of course but I imagine that will just get dropped now, she was his only accuser and probably wouldn't be too interested in pursuing it. It would be a high profile investigation that would stir up at least some diplomatic flak and is not likely to go anywhere. We will probably see him in the background of royal family events (Captain Birdseye costume optional) but other than that, he will most likely be given a stipend and told to stay out of the limelight. Imagine family get togethers going to be a bit awkward from now on.


I agree with all of this except for the last phrase, I doubt family get-togethers will be any more awkward as his family probably has a better idea of his shenanigans than we do, I 'spect they'll get easier as he will be seen as having made some reparation.


----------



## MickiQ (Feb 16, 2022)

izz said:


> I agree with all of this except for the last phrase, I doubt family get-togethers will be any more awkward as his family probably has a better idea of his shenanigans than we do, I 'spect they'll get easier as he will be seen as having made some reparation.


"Daddy why don't we invite Great-Uncle Andy anymore?"
"We don't talk about that George, when you're older I will tell you the story about The Prince Who Couldn't Sweat"


----------



## Kaka Tim (Feb 16, 2022)

izz said:


> I agree with all of this except for the last phrase, I doubt family get-togethers will be any more awkward as his family probably has a better idea of his shenanigans than we do, I 'spect they'll get easier as he will be seen as having made some reparation.


chas will want nothing to do with him as he will see him as a stain on the reputation of the monarchy - hes waited over 70 years for this gig and doesn't want anyone to sully his glorious reign


----------



## quiet guy (Feb 16, 2022)

Oh the Grand Old Duke of York,
He had 12 million quid,
He gave it to an American Girl,
For something "he never did".


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Feb 16, 2022)

Oh the Grand old Duke of York
How frivolous does one get
He frittered away ten million quid
On some lass he’d never met


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 16, 2022)

MickiQ said:


> "Daddy why don't we invite Great-Uncle Andy anymore?"
> "We don't talk about that George, when you're older I will tell you the story about The Prince Who Couldn't Sweat"


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 16, 2022)

Oh the Grand Old Duke of York 
He got a 12million cut.
That’s not bad 
Cos at the time,
He was sat in Pizza Hut.


----------



## Athos (Feb 16, 2022)

Oh The Grand Old Duke of York,
From Mummy he did ponce,
Millions of pounds of taxpayers' cash,
But he's not a sweaty nonce.


----------



## RileyOBlimey (Feb 16, 2022)




----------



## scalyboy (Feb 16, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Oh the Grand old Duke of York
> How frivolous does one get
> He frittered away ten million quid
> On some lass he’d never met


Oh the Grand old Duke of York
He's generous to a fault
This honourable prince paid ten million quid
To avoid a US court 

[needs more work]


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 16, 2022)

Oh the Grand Old Duke of York
Such an awful twat,
blah, blah, blah,
blah, blah, blah.
Such an awful twat.

Perfect.


----------



## scalyboy (Feb 16, 2022)

Oh the Grand old Duke of York
He had ten million smackers
He lost the lot on a legal deal
But he should have lost his knackers

[still needs more work]


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Feb 16, 2022)

I'm sure the Queen is glad that her embarrassing pensioner children are all sorted out.









						Police to investigate Prince Charles' charity
					

There have been no arrests or interviews under caution, London's Metropolitan Police says.



					www.bbc.co.uk
				




Oh...


----------



## DaveCinzano (Feb 16, 2022)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> I'm sure the Queen is glad that her embarrassing pensioner children are all sorted out.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Kids, eh


----------



## fucthest8 (Feb 16, 2022)

This is fairly entertaining, James O'Brien having a little rant

"Its not black and white is it? Whose money is this? Whose 12 million quid is making it's way to Virgina Guiffre and her charity?"


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Feb 16, 2022)

Oh the grand old nonce of York

Fed pizza to his kid

It didn’t prove his innocence

So he paid ten million quid


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 16, 2022)

Oh the Grand Old Duke of York,
He is a sweaty nonce,
He is a sweaty, sweaty, sweaty,
Sweaty fucking nonce.


----------



## Zapp Brannigan (Feb 16, 2022)

Oh the Grand Old Duke Of York
Doesn't sweat even under duress,
Like the time he spent 12 million quid
On a trip to Pizza Express.


----------



## little_legs (Feb 16, 2022)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> I'm sure the Queen is glad that her embarrassing pensioner children are all sorted out.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


a dynastic union between the Houses of Saud and Windsor would actually own


----------



## MickiQ (Feb 16, 2022)

fucthest8 said:


> This is fairly entertaining, James O'Brien having a little rant
> 
> "Its not black and white is it? Whose money is this? Whose 12 million quid is making it's way to Virgina Guiffre and her charity?"


Man has a point it will be ace if attempting to try to draw a line under this ends up tarring Brenda and Chucky as well.
If the real motive turns out to be it not hanging over the Jubilee it might very well ending up doing so anyway if enough people get sniffy about £12M (or whatever it  is) being used to bail out HWCS when folks are struggling with big fuel bills


----------



## killer b (Feb 16, 2022)

MickiQ said:


> it will be ace if attempting to try to draw a line under this ends up tarring Brenda and Chucky as well


I fear this is too much wishful thinking - they can't be so thick that they aren't alive to the PR disaster paying this out of royal funds would create. Great if they are, but...


----------



## pogofish (Feb 16, 2022)

MickiQ said:


> Man has a point it will be ace if attempting to try to draw a line under this ends up tarring Brenda and Chucky as well.
> If the real motive turns out to be it not hanging over the Jubilee it might very well ending up doing so anyway if enough people get sniffy about £12M (or whatever it  is) being used to bail out HWCS when folks are struggling with big fuel bills



I think it will be far more like that the British press/certain media will be out to eviscerate Giuffre, for years to come, every time she spends a penny on anything for "wasting our money".

A few strategically placed "exclusives" and gongs for editors/owners etc will probably mollify the press as far as the rest of the RF goes.


----------



## T & P (Feb 16, 2022)

The Queen could afford Prince Andrew's settlement by making her own packed lunch and ditching Netflix, insists Kirstie Allsopp
					

Television presenter and personal finance expert Kirstie Allsopp has told the Queen not to worry about paying Prince Andrew's huge legal settlement, because a little belt-tightening is all that's needed.




					newsthump.com


----------



## danski (Feb 16, 2022)

The Grand Old Duke of York,
A bally decent chap,
But you and I know better,
He’s really full of...honour?


----------



## pogofish (Feb 16, 2022)

killer b said:


> I fear this is too much wishful thinking - they can't be so thick that they aren't alive to the PR disaster paying this out of royal funds would create. Great if they are, but...



IIRC the Queen is worth around £300 million in personal wealth that is not considered Royal funds.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 16, 2022)

pogofish said:


> I think it will be far more like that the British press/certain media will be out to eviscerate Giuffre, for years to come, every time she spends a penny on anything for "wasting our money".
> 
> A few strategically placed "exclusives" and gongs for editors/owners etc will probably mollify the press as far as the rest of the RF goes.


It's possible. But I think it more likely Andrew will be a whipping boy for years to come, it's not like he was a much loved royal beforehand and the eagerness with which the media have taken to calling him a nonce is far plainer than them having turned on vg.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 16, 2022)

pogofish said:


> IIRC the Queen is worth around £300 million in personal wealth that is not considered Royal funds.


£290m


----------



## two sheds (Feb 16, 2022)

£288m I heard


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 16, 2022)

MickiQ said:


> Man has a point it will be ace if attempting to try to draw a line under this ends up tarring Brenda and Chucky as well.
> If the real motive turns out to be it not hanging over the Jubilee it might very well ending up doing so anyway if enough people get sniffy about £12M (or whatever it  is) being used to bail out HWCS when folks are struggling with big fuel bills


It's going to hang over the jubilee because it's not really reached a conclusion as it would have done if the trial had proceeded. Instead there's this fudge where everyone knows he's guilty as sin but has - with the queen's capacious wallet - paid vg to go away


----------



## killer b (Feb 16, 2022)

pogofish said:


> IIRC the Queen is worth around £300 million in personal wealth that is not considered Royal funds.


I think the british public's view of public and private funds would be somewhat stricter than usual in this case. IE, I don't think her paying any of the settlement would be acceptable, and she knows it.


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 16, 2022)

The butlers and footmen will be off scooting around the local banks carrying a Purdy apiece.


----------



## bluescreen (Feb 16, 2022)

Whatever you may think of James O'Brien, he has a good rant here. He's not going to let people forget to ask who's paying.


----------



## pogofish (Feb 16, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> It's possible. But I think it more likely Andrew will be a whipping boy for years to come, it's not like he was a much loved royal beforehand and the eagerness with which the media have taken to calling him a nonce is far plainer than them having turned on vg.



Yes, he will remain the dark shadow in the background but the rest will be OK.

Losing him to one of the lesser houses around Balmoral or Sandringham as a "manager"/family representative is a possibility I'd expect - he's been sent up here for prolonged periods before and James Middleton keeps being despatched to play the mine host at a remote highland estate owned by Brocksbank's family every time he looks like he's about to fuck-up.  I heard he was back again just yesterday!


----------



## pogofish (Feb 16, 2022)

killer b said:


> I think the british public's view of public and private funds would be somewhat stricter than usual in this case. IE, I don't think her paying any of the settlement would be acceptable, and she knows it.



Maybe but whilst we, or more likely parliament have some justification in asking about how public money gets used, her private wealth is as sacrosanct as that of any other oligarch or rich/rip-off fucker.


----------



## killer b (Feb 16, 2022)

pogofish said:


> Maybe but whilst we, or more likely parliament have some justification in asking about how public money gets used, her private wealth is as sacrosanct as that of any other oligarch or rich/rip-off fucker.


It doesn't matter - if she uses her private wealth to get her son off a rape charge - or if the source of the payoff is vague enough for us to assume she's paying it - the british public will consider it _them _paying, which is something she'll be very keen to avoid. So I'm 99% sure she won't have done, cause I reckon she isn't as thick as sweaty.


----------



## bluescreen (Feb 16, 2022)

I still reckon he could go bankrupt, and she'd let him.


----------



## pogofish (Feb 16, 2022)

killer b said:


> It doesn't matter - if she uses her private wealth to get her son off a rape charge - or if the source of the payoff is vague enough for us to assume she's paying it - the british public will consider it _them _paying, which is something she'll be very keen to avoid. So I'm 99% sure she won't have done, cause I reckon she isn't as thick as sweaty.



Maybe - but her whole family have an established network of financiers dedicated to keeping their personal business private, so I think they can manage it.


----------



## scalyboy (Feb 16, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> Whatever you may think of James O'Brien, he has a good rant here. He's not going to let people forget to ask who's paying.



I like how he emphasises how astonishing and incredible it is that the Queen is paying £12 million (or some of that, or a different amount) when ordinary people are struggling to heat their homes. It _is_ incredible in the 21st century but many people accept it as the norm. Good to be reminded of this.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Feb 16, 2022)

Ex-HRHaiku

Sweat-free Duke of York
Paid millions to stranger
Because he's a nonce


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 16, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> I still reckon he could go bankrupt, and she'd let him.


He's already well-known as a moral bankrupt


----------



## Raheem (Feb 16, 2022)

pogofish said:


> IIRC the Queen is worth around £300 million in personal wealth that is not considered Royal funds.


World War 2 was a great time to be a mechanic.


----------



## killer b (Feb 16, 2022)

pogofish said:


> Maybe - but her whole family have an established network of financiers dedicated to keeping their personal business private, so I think they can manage it.


Manage what? If they 'keep it private' they might as well say 'yeah she paid it', and it'll accomplish more or less the same reputational damage to the royal family that they'll been keen to avoid.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 16, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> Sign the Petition
> 
> 
> Who is paying for Prince Andrew's settlement?
> ...


Bump.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 16, 2022)




----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 16, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> View attachment 310357


This place is getting like the BBC with all the repeats


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 16, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> Sign the Petition
> 
> 
> Who is paying for Prince Andrew's settlement?
> ...


Bump.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Feb 16, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> Bump.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 16, 2022)

cupid_stunt said:


> View attachment 310358


😵‍💫


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 16, 2022)

cupid_stunt said:


> View attachment 310358


Sadness in his eyes


----------



## Yossarian (Feb 16, 2022)

Oh, the Grand Old Duke of York
He raped a trafficked kid
But the Queen will pay the legal bills
No matter what he did


----------



## magneze (Feb 16, 2022)

cupid_stunt said:


> View attachment 310358


Is that the side panel of a Fiat Uno? 🤔


----------



## nogojones (Feb 16, 2022)

bemused said:


> Not sure they'll be high profile but he'll sneak into low-level roles - parks commissioner or something that fulfilled his immense entitlement.


And whenever he shows up somewhere, there'll be at least one person shouting "NONCE!"


----------



## Raheem (Feb 16, 2022)

He said it was down. It was up.
He said it was up. It was down.
He said he'd been eating doughballs in
The centre of Woking town.


----------



## dessiato (Feb 16, 2022)

I see one of Chucky's charities is being investigated for corruption now.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 16, 2022)

It never fails to amaze that he's Brenda's favourite son, just how massive a cunt does she think Chucky is?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Feb 16, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> *It never fails to amaze that he's Brenda's favourite son,* just how massive a cunt does she think Chucky is?



I doubt he is any longer.


----------



## nogojones (Feb 16, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> Bump.


I might start a very carefully worded go fund me for his expenses, just to see who bites


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 16, 2022)

nogojones said:


> I might start a very carefully worded go fund me for his expenses, just to see who bites


I have a bag of rusty washers I could donate.


----------



## T & P (Feb 16, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> It never fails to amaze that he's Brenda's favourite son, just how massive a cunt does she think Chucky is?


Furthermore, what kind of undisclosed horrors has Edward committed for Andrew to be Brenda’s favourite son?


----------



## friedaweed (Feb 16, 2022)




----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 16, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> It never fails to amaze that he's Brenda's favourite son, just how massive a cunt does she think Chucky is?


Or know.


----------



## nogojones (Feb 16, 2022)

Sprocket. said:


> I have a bag of rusty washers I could donate.


Sorry Sprocket. Raw cash or crypto only..

Have you heard about our new decentralised currency's launch next week?

www.noncecoin.org


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 16, 2022)




----------



## Sue (Feb 16, 2022)

People bemoaning the lack of


Bahnhof Strasse said:


> View attachment 310388


Feels like that's missing a few options.


----------



## Athos (Feb 16, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> View attachment 310388


I hope it's not removed; to do so would imply the institution has some moral authority.  I'd rather he remain Duke of York, and the noncing brings the whole vile system into disrepute.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 16, 2022)

Sue said:


> People bemoaning the lack of
> 
> Feels like that's missing a few options.


And the point.


----------



## Yossarian (Feb 16, 2022)

Sue said:


> People bemoaning the lack of
> 
> Feels like that's missing a few options.



"He can keep the title, but not his head."


----------



## T & P (Feb 16, 2022)

At least one of the papers was claiming as part of the settlement both parties must now remain silent on any aspects of the affair for the duration of the Jubilee celebrations, but afterwards the ban is lifted and Virginia Giuffre is at liberty to talk about it as much as she pleases. Including writing books/ TV interviews or documentaries, etc.

The paper speculates there could even be a tell-all book out in time for Xmas if she feels so inclined. And I doubt Andrew would be in any position to try to slap an injunction on it, or have any chance of successfully suing for libel about anything in it afterwards.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 16, 2022)

T & P said:


> At least one of the papers was claiming as part of the settlement both parties must now remain silent on any aspects of the affair for the duration of the Jubilee celebrations, but afterwards the ban is lifted and Virginia Giuffre is at liberty to talk about it as much as she pleases. Including writing books/ TV interviews or documentaries, etc.
> 
> The paper speculates there could even be a tell-all book out in time for Xmas if she feels so inclined. And I doubt Andrew would be in any position to try to slap an injunction on it, or have any chance of successfully suing for libel about anything in it afterwards.


Good. It’s shocking that she’s gagged, but it’s only to spare Dear Old Queenie’s blushes in her special year.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 16, 2022)

Quick question (and I got flamed for this, this afternoon, without a reasonable explanation).

Why did David Bowie get a pass on shagging Maddox and Starr, who _he knew_ to be 15 at the time, whilst Sweatless gets crucified for shagging a 17 year old?

Changing times?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Feb 16, 2022)

Trafficked kids ?


----------



## killer b (Feb 16, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> and I got flamed for this, this afternoon, without a reasonable explanation


where did this happen?

fwiw I'm not sure Bowie does 'get a pass'. it's been discussed many times on urban and while some people prefer to look past it, it seems to be widely recognised as a bad thing.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 16, 2022)

Looks like the stress of it all is showing on Brenda...





Hopefully she'll spoil the celebrations by doing the off before June


----------



## clicker (Feb 16, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Looks like the stress of it all is showing on Brenda...
> 
> View attachment 310397
> 
> ...


Is she turning into a turtle?


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 16, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> Quick question (and I got flamed for this, this afternoon, without a reasonable explanation).
> 
> Why did David Bowie get a pass on shagging Maddox and Starr, who _he knew_ to be 15 at the time, whilst Sweatless gets crucified for shagging a 17 year old?
> 
> Changing times?


I don’t think Bowie does “get a pass”. Most people think it was abusive and creepy.


----------



## ska invita (Feb 16, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Looks like the stress of it all is showing on Brenda...
> 
> 
> View attachment 310397
> ...


has she lost weight?
she looks about 12 million pounds lighter anyway


----------



## brogdale (Feb 16, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Looks like the stress of it all is showing on Brenda...
> 
> View attachment 310397
> 
> ...


Same streets; different people partying?


----------



## friedaweed (Feb 16, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> Quick question (and I got flamed for this, this afternoon, without a reasonable explanation).
> 
> Why did David Bowie get a pass on shagging Maddox and Starr, who _he knew_ to be 15 at the time, whilst Sweatless gets crucified for shagging a 17 year old?
> 
> Changing times?


No I think that has more to do with how much some people have "hero-invested" in the likes of Bowie. If it was Bono he'd be toast by now Shaun Ryder we might turn a blind eye because of the drugs. Same goes for Roy Harper, Elvis, Jerry Lee, Dylan. and we saw it with the fans of glitter and even Saville up until the end. Basically it bursts peoples bubbles to realise their heroes are not cool and edgy but predatory and not bound by societal norms when it comes to sex.

I liken it to sharks and dolphins. No one gives a fuck if a shark gets caught in a fishing net but because people are conditioned to think Dolphins are a bit curvaceous and sexy it's wrong if they get caught up in the same shit.


----------



## friedaweed (Feb 16, 2022)

S


ska invita said:


> has she lost weight?
> she looks about 12 million pounds lighter anyway


She's still a mum. Must be a shite experience for someone who has given her life for some fucktard bollix.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 16, 2022)

friedaweed said:


> S
> 
> She's still a mum. Must be a shite experience for someone who has given her life for some fucktard bollix.




That room she's stood in is bigger than my mum's whole fucking house. I truly hope she sees what an utter scumfucker she raised and how her whole life's work is teetering on the brink of crashing down cos of it.


----------



## ouirdeaux (Feb 16, 2022)

Sharks are edible.


----------



## pogofish (Feb 16, 2022)

killer b said:


> Manage what? If they 'keep it private' they might as well say 'yeah she paid it', and it'll accomplish more or less the same reputational damage to the royal family that they'll been keen to avoid.



Either way, the Royal archives are exempt from all the normal information access/release rules and have been used to bury potentially compromising stuff before - eg relating to the Duke of Windsor, so unless they actually decide to tell us, (which I don't believe for one moment) we will never know for sure.


----------



## killer b (Feb 16, 2022)

pogofish said:


> Either way, the Royal archives are exempt from all the normal information access/release rules and have been used to bury potentially compromising stuff before - eg relating to the Duke of Windsor, so unless they actually decide to tell us, (which I don't believe for one moment) we will never know for sure.


But none of this stuff matters - everyone knows that Andrew Windsor's only real source of money is his mum, and all of her money - all of it - is ours. So we do know for sure that we paid for it, whatever means they have of burying compromising stuff, unless they release some very convincing story about where _else_ the money's come from. Which I'm expecting to see sometime soon.


----------



## Glitter (Feb 16, 2022)

There’s a difference between ‘consensual but underage’ and ‘trafficked’

Neither are right but one is a whole lot more wrong.


----------



## friedaweed (Feb 16, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> That room she's stood in is bigger than my mum's whole fucking house. I truly hope she sees what an utter scumfucker she raised and how her whole life's work is teetering on the brink of crashing down cos of it.


Calm down La. I was just queuing teuchter up for one of his god save the queen posts


----------



## friedaweed (Feb 16, 2022)

ouirdeaux said:


> Sharks are edible.


So was Bowie


----------



## Yossarian (Feb 16, 2022)

friedaweed said:


> No I think that has more to do with how much some people have "hero-invested" in the likes of Bowie. If it was Bono he'd be toast by now Shaun Ryder we might turn a blind eye because of the drugs. Same goes for Roy Harper, Elvis, Jerry Lee, Dylan. and we saw it with the fans of glitter and even Saville up until the end. Basically it bursts peoples bubbles to realise their heroes are not cool and edgy but predatory and not bound by societal norms when it comes to sex.



Yep - Bowie's reputation has been helped by the fact that there were never any legal proceedings - if he was alive and women that he'd given drugs to and had sex with when they were underage filed lawsuits, I think a lot of fans would probably be all too ready to dismiss them as "gold-digging" liars.


----------



## friedaweed (Feb 16, 2022)

Yossarian said:


> Yep - Bowie's reputation has been helped by the fact that there were never any legal proceedings - if he was alive and women that he'd given drugs to and had sex with when they were underage filed lawsuits, I think a lot of fans would probably be all too ready to dismiss them as "gold-digging" liars.


Yup which has been the modus operandi to discredit women in these situations since sex drugs and rock and roll began. Loads of my mates got me munted, none of them took advantage of me outside of that one eyebrow shaving foam incident.


----------



## kenny g (Feb 16, 2022)

Glitter said:


> There’s a difference between ‘consensual but underage’ and ‘trafficked’
> 
> Neither are right but one is a whole lot more wrong.


I thought if you are underage you can't legally consent.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 16, 2022)

kenny g said:


> I thought if you are underage you can't legally consent.



You thought wrong.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 16, 2022)

Shocking how many people are unaware of what consent actually means.


----------



## Sweet FA (Feb 16, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> Quick question (and I got flamed for this, this afternoon, without a reasonable explanation).
> 
> Why did David Bowie get a pass on shagging Maddox and Starr, who _he knew_ to be 15 at the time, whilst Sweatless gets crucified for shagging a 17 year old?
> 
> Changing times?


She was 13. 

Aged 14 with Jimmy Page. 

Cheesypoof told me this was OK because Maddox described it as a 'beautiful experience'.


----------



## Yossarian (Feb 16, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> You thought wrong.



It's phrased that way in the penal codes of the US states where a lot of these cases are prosecuted - "legally incapable of consent."


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 16, 2022)

fuck it, going to bed


----------



## Raheem (Feb 16, 2022)

ska invita said:


> has she lost weight?
> she looks about 12 million pounds lighter anyway


Another case of a hard-up single mother having to choose between feeding herself and paying for the things her children need.


----------



## Weller (Feb 16, 2022)

loving some of the reviews on pizza express   


PIZZA EXPRESS, Woking - 65 Goldsworth Rd - Updated 2022 Restaurant Reviews, Menu, Prices & Restaurant Reviews - Food Delivery & Takeaway - Tripadvisor


----------



## bluescreen (Feb 16, 2022)




----------



## pogofish (Feb 16, 2022)

killer b said:


> But none of this stuff matters - everyone knows that Andrew Windsor's only real source of money is his mum, and all of her money - all of it - is ours. So we do know for sure that we paid for it, whatever means they have of burying compromising stuff, unless they release some very convincing story about where _else_ the money's come from. Which I'm expecting to see sometime soon.



It doesn't matter to us but until someone can conclusively prove the source of the money, they will get a fairly easy ride and even be excused by their toadies, then business as usual, except for Andrew.  This lot have plenty of skeletons rattling away in Windsor.  Prince Albert Victor could well be another, and Prince George, Duke of Kent.

I'd guess it will be dismissed/stonewalled as yet another "private matter" which of course the Royal Family never publicly comment-on and instead, I'd bet that the focus will move to Giuffre and whatever she might do with the money once its been paid-out.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 16, 2022)

Randy Andy, needs looking at https://commonslibrary.parliament.u... Wealth Orders allow for,and their use so far.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 16, 2022)

MickiQ said:


> Nice thought of course but I imagine that will just get dropped now, she was his only accuser and probably wouldn't be too interested in pursuing it. It would be a high profile investigation that would stir up at least some diplomatic flak and is not likely to go anywhere. We will probably see him in the background of royal family events (Captain Birdseye costume optional) but other than that, he will most likely be given a stipend and told to stay out of the limelight. Imagine family get togethers going to be a bit awkward from now on.




They don’t want to talk to him specifically regarding Virginia Guiffre, they want to speak to him regarding Epstein, and they still do. 

Airmiles Andy will fly no further than Inverness from now on.


----------



## two sheds (Feb 16, 2022)

Prince Andrew’s settlement statement ‘inconsistent’, says Maitlis – live
					

Parliament intends to make sure public money is not used in settlement




					www.independent.co.uk
				






> But according to _The Telegraph_, a clause prevents the duke from repeating his claim that he does not recall meeting Ms Giuffre.
> 
> She, on the other hand, could soon be free to speak publicly under the terms of the agreement reached this weekend, the paper reports.



Oho! More to come then.


----------



## Calamity1971 (Feb 16, 2022)

friedaweed said:


> S
> 
> She's still a mum. Must be a shite experience for someone who has given her life for some fucktard bollix.


She's not ya normal mum though Is she. I can't remember having to make an appointment to see mine or curtsying when she entered the room with me tea. Fuck er.


----------



## Calamity1971 (Feb 16, 2022)

friedaweed said:


> Calm down La. I was just queuing teuchter up for one of his god save the queen posts


Phew.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Feb 16, 2022)

two sheds said:


> Prince Andrew’s settlement statement ‘inconsistent’, says Maitlis – live
> 
> 
> Parliament intends to make sure public money is not used in settlement
> ...


With the intellectual élan one associates with the third born child of cousins-who-married, he appears to have comprehensively triangulated himself


----------



## two sheds (Feb 16, 2022)

Calamity1971 said:


> She's not ya normal mum though Is she. I can't remember having to make an appointment to see mine or curtsying when she entered the room with me tea. Fuck er.


That's the trouble with younger generation, no respect


----------



## Calamity1971 (Feb 16, 2022)




----------



## Orang Utan (Feb 16, 2022)

I think we should cut his head off. That'd show him.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 16, 2022)

Calamity1971 said:


> She's not ya normal mum though Is she. I can't remember having to make an appointment to see mine or curtsying when she entered the room with me tea. Fuck er.




I would curtsy if your mum entered the room.


----------



## T & P (Feb 16, 2022)

I ended rewatching this evening a highlights video of his BBC interview. His claims felt  even more cringeworthy, outrageous and ludicrous than the first time round.


----------



## RileyOBlimey (Feb 17, 2022)




----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Feb 17, 2022)

Calamity1971 said:


> She's not ya normal mum though Is she. I can't remember having to make an appointment to see mine or curtsying when she entered the room with me tea. Fuck er.


An ex-bf of mine had to make an appointment to see his parents, sort of, in that they owned/ran a small country house hotel, and so whenever he went home for a visit he'd have to call ahead and book a room. 

You've heard of parents who grumble to their kids about 'you treat our house like an hotel!', well for his folks the equivalent would be you treat our hotel like your house!


----------



## Raheem (Feb 17, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> Quick question (and I got flamed for this, this afternoon, without a reasonable explanation).
> 
> Why did David Bowie get a pass on shagging Maddox and Starr, who _he knew_ to be 15 at the time, whilst Sweatless gets crucified for shagging a 17 year old?
> 
> Changing times?


Might belong on the unpopular opinions thread but, IMO, this probably never happened. Reason being the story has been told a number of times with inconsistencies that go well beyond misremembered details to the extent that it is very clearly mostly fabrication. Right down to who exactly did and didn't have sex with Bowie.

For balance, though, there's a 1980s sexual assault allegation against him which is more credible, although he got off.

It's true, though that many people will give Bowie a pass regardless of the evidence. Because if we paid attention to all the bad behaviour of  musicians we'd have problems finding stuff to listen to.

Jimi Hendrix. Threw a bottle at his girlfriend's head. Serious enough that Chas Chandler decided to stop working with him.

Bill Withers. Well-documented incident of domestic violence, in newspapers at the time. Girlfriend needed hospital treatment.

Jimmy Pursey. On the sex offenders register for forcibly French kissing a woman in the street.

Edith Piaf. Performed at Nazi work camps during WW2.

Peter Tosh. Known as "Peter Touch" because he liked to grope women in the street. Apparently without complaint from Bob Marley or the other Wailers.

Ray Davies. Beat a sound technician unconscious.

John Lennon. Well-documented abusive husband.

James Brown. Convicted wife-beater.

Morrissey. You know already.

I regularly listen to music by all of these. But the list goes on.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 17, 2022)

Raheem said:


> Might belong on the unpopular opinions thread but, IMO, this probably never happened.



So you're saying that Maddox and Starr were lying with this:



> He invited both Lori Maddox and Sable Starr to dinner and later his hotel room in the Beverly Hilton. Starr was often possessive and selfish about her men and warned Maddox not to engage in any form of intimacy with Bowie. Maddox remembers Sable telling her, “If you touch David, I will kill you.”
> 
> 
> However, Bowie invited Lori Maddox to the bathroom and got into the bathtub and requested for her to wash his back. Maddox remembers the incident and said that Bowie was wearing a beautiful red, orange, and yellow kimono. She confirmed the fact that Bowie later took her to the bedroom and took off her clothes to deflower her.
> ...



But they were only 15.

Silly girls.


----------



## Raheem (Feb 17, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> So you're saying that Maddox and Starr were lying with this:


I don't know where that's from.

Lori Maddox told her story three or four times. The different versions are different enough that she is lying about some parts of the story. It's possible that having sex with Bowie is a part that she is not lying about, but it's impossible to say IMO.

Sable Starr tells a different story, where it is her, rather than Lori, who spends the night with Bowie.

It can't be ruled out that Bowie had sex with either or both of them. But, based on the evidence, I think it is more likely that they made the whole thing up.

Lori also had sex with Mick Jagger at a secret Beatles reunion recording session in the 70s, so she says.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 17, 2022)

Raheem said:


> I don't know where that's from.
> 
> Lori Maddox told her story three or four times. The different versions are different enough that she is lying about some parts of the story. It's possible that having sex with Bowie is a part that she is not lying about, but it's impossible to say IMO.
> 
> ...



Victim blaming bollocks.

Shame on you.

Bowie fucked Maddox and Starr when they were 15, and he was in his 20s


----------



## Raheem (Feb 17, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> Victim blaming bollocks.
> 
> Shame on you.
> 
> Bowie fucked Maddox and Starr when they were 15, and he was in his 20s


I'm not blaming them. I'm saying their stories are doubtful. I'm not particularly arsed about convincing anyone else, but you can find the different versions of the tale on the internet if you want to.

Come on, you have two groupies each telling a story about the same evening, where one ditched the other and who had sex with Bowie depends on who is telling the story? 

It might have happened. Probably didn't.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 17, 2022)

Raheem said:


> Come on, you have two groupies each telling a story about the same evening, where one ditched the other and who had sex with Bowie depends on who is telling the story?
> 
> It might have happened. Probably didn't.



Yeah.

What a pair of bullshitting "groupies"

You're right. Bowie probably didnt fuck  the two lying 15 year old girls


----------



## Raheem (Feb 17, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> Yeah.
> 
> What a pair of bullshitting "groupies"
> 
> You're right. Bowie probably didnt fuck  the two lying 15 year old girls


Or, on the other hand, it must be true cos I read it on the internet.

What we can say for sure without examining any actual evidence is that it's either true or it isn't. I'm happy to leave it at that.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 17, 2022)

Raheem said:


> Or, on the other hand, it must be true cos I read it on the internet.
> 
> What we can say for sure without examining any actual evidence is that it's either true or it isn't. I'm happy to leave it at that.



Or you could just bend yourself into a polo, trying to excuse the inexcusable. 

“Everything you’ve read is lies”

Shameful


----------



## Raheem (Feb 17, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> Or you could just bend yourself into a polo, trying to excuse the inexcusable.
> 
> “Everything you’ve read is lies”
> 
> Shameful


Or maybe it's something you don't know everything about.


----------



## rubbershoes (Feb 17, 2022)

Just a reminder that this thread has been going for 7 years


----------



## brogdale (Feb 17, 2022)

There may or may not be some equivalence between the sex crimes of Andrew Windsor and any number of celebrities, but surely it is hopelessly naive to expect any consistency in the public perception or reactions to such actions? Particularly when Windsor represents an hereditary institution that claims to embody the state and expects that citizens should look up to his family as some sort of ideal?

What is to be gained from whataboutery on this thread about the vile sweaty nonce?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 17, 2022)

Seems that the agreement Prince Andrew reached to avoid the court case going ahead prevents him from denying he raped Virginia Roberts. Surely whenever his head pops up above the parapet folk will ask him outright if he raped her?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 17, 2022)

rubbershoes said:


> Just a reminder that this thread has been going for 7 years




One tenth of Brenda’s glorious reign


----------



## MickiQ (Feb 17, 2022)

Weller said:


> loving some of the reviews on pizza express
> 
> 
> PIZZA EXPRESS, Woking - 65 Goldsworth Rd - Updated 2022 Restaurant Reviews, Menu, Prices & Restaurant Reviews - Food Delivery & Takeaway - Tripadvisor
> View attachment 310409


It's time like this you realise there are some very funny people out there


----------



## MickiQ (Feb 17, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Seems that the agreement Prince Andrew reached to avoid the court case going ahead prevents him from denying he raped Virginia Roberts. Surely whenever his head pops up above the parapet folk will ask him outright if he raped her?


Not only him but his relatives as well, When King Chucky is doing his welcome tour once he's on the throne then it probably is going to come up, perhaps not in this country but certainly abroad.
"Gd'day Your Majesty Welcome to Australia, how's your nonce of a kid brother doing these days?"
This is why I think a lot of effort will be put into keeping TAFKA out of the limelight from now on, he's disposable when it comes to protecting the institution of the monarchy itself.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 17, 2022)

two sheds said:


> £288m I heard


at this rate she'll be broke by xmas


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 17, 2022)

MickiQ said:


> Not only him but his relatives as well, When King Chucky is doing his welcome tour once he's on the throne then it probably is going to come up, perhaps not in this country but certainly abroad.
> "Gd'day Your Majesty Welcome to Australia, how's your nonce of a kid brother doing these days?"
> This is why I think a lot of effort will be put into keeping TAFKA out of the limelight from now on, he's disposable when it comes to protecting the institution of the monarchy itself.


yes he's been looking a little flushed


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Feb 17, 2022)




----------



## friedaweed (Feb 17, 2022)

Calamity1971 said:


> She's not ya normal mum though Is she. I can't remember having to *make an appointment to see mine or curtsying when she entered the room with me tea.* Fuck er.


That's what it's like at my MIL's


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 17, 2022)

friedaweed said:


> That's what it's like at my MIL's


----------



## Serge Forward (Feb 17, 2022)

But Shep's Banjo Boys were good


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 17, 2022)

poor auld shep


----------



## DaveCinzano (Feb 17, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> poor auld shep
> 
> View attachment 310449


Is it me or does he look slightly...mesmerised?

Paging danny la rouge


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 17, 2022)

John Noakes was one of my few heroes as a kid. He’d do anything from climbing towers without a harness, to bob sleighing, to making chocolate crispies with raisins. Please don’t tell me any bad stories about him, I don’t think I could take it.


----------



## Serge Forward (Feb 17, 2022)

Peter Purves on the other hand...


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 17, 2022)

Serge Forward said:


> Peter Purves on the other hand...


not peter purves


----------



## Serge Forward (Feb 17, 2022)

In the late 70s, Peter Purves would occasionally go to the Electric Circus in Manchester and hang out with all the punks


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 17, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> not peter purves


Valerie Singleton kept Purves on his toes!


----------



## belboid (Feb 17, 2022)

Sprocket. said:


> Valerie Singleton kept Purves on his toes!


Valerie Singleton briefly went out with Tony James from Sigue Sigue Sputnik


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 17, 2022)

belboid said:


> Valerie Singleton briefly went out with Tony James from Sigue Sigue Sputnik


And before that, Pete Murray and Albert Finney.


----------



## Badgers (Feb 17, 2022)




----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 17, 2022)




----------



## cupid_stunt (Feb 17, 2022)

Badgers said:


>




I started off falling for that , until she got to 'he may be a sex offender, but he's our sex offender' , then google confirmed she's a comedian and satirist.


----------



## friedaweed (Feb 17, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> John Noakes was one of my few heroes as a kid. He’d do anything from climbing towers without a harness, to bob sleighing, to making chocolate crispies with raisins. Please don’t tell me any bad stories about him, I don’t think I could take it.


You never see his other hand in any of the pictures of him and Shep. Look at the image above, it's so obvious.

Dog Wanker.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Feb 17, 2022)

Trouble is with GB News, it's hard to believe they are being serious with most of their output, so easy enough to start off thinking Rosie Hort was being serious, as I've not come across her before. 

I didn't fall for their recent interview with Churchill, because I know he's dead, so it had to be a lookalike.


----------



## surreybrowncap (Feb 17, 2022)

friedaweed said:


> You never see his other hand in any of the pictures of him and Shep. Look at the image above, it's so obvious.
> 
> Dog Wanker.


Partial to a bit of elephant too….


----------



## RileyOBlimey (Feb 17, 2022)

Badgers said:


>


----------



## Wilf (Feb 17, 2022)

two sheds said:


> Prince Andrew’s settlement statement ‘inconsistent’, says Maitlis – live
> 
> 
> Parliament intends to make sure public money is not used in settlement
> ...


So, no admission of guilt but, by legal agreement, he can't reassert he didn't rape her.  He truly is Schrodinger's nonce.


----------



## tim (Feb 17, 2022)

T & P said:


> Furthermore, what kind of undisclosed horrors has Edward committed for Andrew to be Brenda’s favourite son?


None, he's so boring, she's forgotten who he is.


----------



## not a trot (Feb 17, 2022)

tim said:


> None, he's so boring, she's forgotten who he is.


The house she bought him in Bagshot,is right next door to a Beefeater Inn. Think she was trying to tell him something.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 17, 2022)

tim said:


> None, he's so boring, she's forgotten who he is.


Like Brian blessed in Blackadder


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 17, 2022)

not a trot said:


> The house she bought him in Bagshot,is right next door to a Beefeater Inn. Think she was trying to tell him something.





Pickman's model said:


> Like Brian blessed in Blackadder



And Brian Blessed also lives in Bagshot


----------



## two sheds (Feb 17, 2022)

cupid_stunt said:


> Trouble is with GB News, it's hard to believe they are being serious with most of their output, so easy enough to start off thinking Rosie Hort was being serious, as I've not come across her before.
> 
> I didn't fall for their recent interview with Churchill, because I know he's dead, so it had to be a lookalike.


She's done some wonderful stuff, have a look.


----------



## Orang Utan (Feb 17, 2022)

friedaweed said:


> You never see his other hand in any of the pictures of him and Shep. Look at the image above, it's so obvious.
> 
> Dog Wanker.


So that’s why he cried so much when the dog deid


----------



## UrbaneFox (Feb 17, 2022)

York seeks to revoke Prince Andrew’s honorary freedom of the city
					

Exclusive: Status had almost been forgotten until a former council official tipped off the Guardian




					www.theguardian.com
				




🤣


----------



## Wilf (Feb 17, 2022)

UrbaneFox said:


> York seeks to revoke Prince Andrew’s honorary freedom of the city
> 
> 
> Exclusive: Status had almost been forgotten until a former council official tipped off the Guardian
> ...


De-Noncification.


----------



## two sheds (Feb 17, 2022)

There's going to be a film isn't there


----------



## UrbaneFox (Feb 17, 2022)

two sheds said:


> There's going to be a film isn't there


Starring Steve Coogan.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 17, 2022)

two sheds said:


> There's going to be a film isn't there


The Nonciness of Andrew.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 17, 2022)

Oh love it, that article makes it clear that they want this to be the first stage in getting his dukedom revoked, he'll not like that much, neither will Fergie, a woman who he refers to as The Duchess...


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 17, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> Sign the Petition
> 
> 
> Who is paying for Prince Andrew's settlement?
> ...


Just wondered how this was going.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 17, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> Just wondered how this was going.


I hope danny gets back to you but he's been a bit slack lately


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 17, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> I hope danny gets back to you but he's been a bit slack lately


His mind’s not on the job.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 17, 2022)

two sheds said:


> There's going to be a film isn't there


From prince to pauper


----------



## Wilf (Feb 17, 2022)

two sheds said:


> There's going to be a film isn't there


_Parasite_.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 17, 2022)

Or...





__





						The Duke
					

'The Duke' is a moving true story that celebrates a man who was determined to live a meaningful life.  Set in 1961, it follows the story of Kempton Bunton, a 60-year old taxi driver, who stole Goya's portrait of the Duke of Wellington.




					www.myvue.com


----------



## Raheem (Feb 17, 2022)

Mystic Pizza


----------



## MickiQ (Feb 17, 2022)

Wilf said:


> Or...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Broadbent and Mirren are normally excellent but that looks awesome.


----------



## UrbaneFox (Feb 17, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> he'll not like that much, neither will Fergie, a woman who he refers to as The Duchess...


Don't they deserve each other? I do hope they make another series of The Windsors.


----------



## mx wcfc (Feb 17, 2022)




----------



## A380 (Feb 17, 2022)

two sheds said:


> There's going to be a film isn't there


The Duke's a Hazzard.


----------



## pogofish (Feb 18, 2022)

not a trot said:


> The house she bought him in Bagshot,is right next door to a Beefeater Inn. Think she was trying to tell him something.



She didn't buy it for him.  Bagshot Park was already in Royal ownership but had been loaned to the Army since WW2.  After they pulled-out, it looks like although he started with the house alone on a peppercorn rent, the lease Edward eventually negotiated with the Crown seems to be amongst the most advantageous of any of the junior Royals property/accommodation deals - and he's got it for 150 years, with letting rights on the various estate properties, which could make him and his descendants all the five million-plus he has reputedly spent on the place back and more.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 18, 2022)

Regarding where the dough is coming from; Queenie doesn’t want to be seen to pay a rape victim to stay quiet, so she has paid £2m to Virginia’s charity. The remaining £10m has come from a ‘bridging loan’ from her and Charles.

Will be one of those ‘loans’ that parents give to kids that no one pays any attention to the paying back part. When questions are raised as to the paying back there will be mumblings about the chalet and investments. Btw, every report on the chalet is no profit will be made on it and it was bought via gift of cash from mum and mortgage, plus deferred payment of a lump (court case last year for his honourable welching on that deal).

So in total the Queen and future king have paid a child rape victim to keep shtum.

God Save The Queen!


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 18, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Regarding where the dough is coming from; Queenie doesn’t want to be seen to pay a rape victim to stay quiet, so she has paid £2m to Virginia’s charity. The remaining £10m has come from a ‘bridging loan’ from her and Charles.
> 
> Will be one of those ‘loans’ that parents give to kids that no one pays any attention to the paying back part. When questions are raised as to the paying back there will be mumblings about the chalet and investments. Btw, every report on the chalet is no profit will be made on it and it was bought via gift of cash from mum and mortgage, plus deferred payment of a lump (court case last year for his honourable welching on that deal).
> 
> ...



He's gonna pay that ten million back just as soon as he gets paid for his job as a...national disgrace.


----------



## Chilli.s (Feb 18, 2022)

I imagine Andy at his Mummys with his servants and teddy bears dreaming of becoming Royal Ambassador For Fallen Women and touring the world again doing sterling work, putting all this behind, indeed finding the positive in it to springboard a new career


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 18, 2022)

Chilli.s said:


> I imagine Andy at his Mummys with his servants and teddy bears dreaming of becoming Royal Ambassador For Fallen Women and touring the world again doing sterling work, putting all this behind, indeed finding the positive in it to springboard a new career


You think he dreams about picking up these fallen women


----------



## andysays (Feb 18, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Regarding where the dough is coming from; Queenie doesn’t want to be seen to pay a rape victim to stay quiet, so she has paid £2m to Virginia’s charity. The remaining £10m has come from a ‘bridging loan’ from her and Charles.
> 
> Will be one of those ‘loans’ that parents give to kids that no one pays any attention to the paying back part. When questions are raised as to the paying back there will be mumblings about the chalet and investments. Btw, every report on the chalet is no profit will be made on it and it was bought via gift of cash from mum and mortgage, plus deferred payment of a lump (court case last year for his honourable welching on that deal).
> 
> ...


There was a piece on the BBC website yesterday looking at this, and they basically came to the conclusion that only genuine source of income he has now is his Royal Navy pension.

However this is dressed up, whatever attempts are made to portray it otherwise, this pay off is coming out of the Royal coffers, which means, essentially, that we the public are paying for it, even if indirectly.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 18, 2022)

andysays said:


> There was a piece on the BBC website yesterday looking at this, and they basically came to the conclusion that only genuine source of income he has now is his Royal Navy pension.
> 
> However this is dressed up, whatever attempts are made to portray it otherwise, this pay off is coming out of the Royal coffers, which means, essentially, that we the public are paying for it, even if indirectly.




£20,000 a year. Allsop's clearly been giving him tips on how to stretch it to ski chalets in Verbier and paying off children he raped.


----------



## prunus (Feb 18, 2022)

andysays said:


> There was a piece on the BBC website yesterday looking at this, and they basically came to the conclusion that only genuine source of income he has now is his Royal Navy pension.
> 
> However this is dressed up, whatever attempts are made to portray it otherwise, this pay off is coming out of the Royal coffers, which means, essentially, that we the public are paying for it, even if indirectly.



Pretty sure we pay for Royal Navy pensions, too.


----------



## andysays (Feb 18, 2022)

prunus said:


> Pretty sure we pay for Royal Navy pensions, too.


This is true, though my point was intended to be that his pension isn't going to cover it, even if he cancels his Netflix subscription and makes his own sandwiches.


----------



## two sheds (Feb 18, 2022)

cancelling the skiing holidays will save a bit if he does that - surprised Allsopp didn't recommend that more generally.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Feb 18, 2022)

two sheds said:


> cancelling the skiing holidays will save a bit if he does that - surprised Allsopp didn't recommend that more generally.


Hey - she's not a monster


----------



## Wilf (Feb 18, 2022)

Just on the money, but also the previous discussion as to whether they will allow him back to doing duties:  I don't think there's a cat in hell's chance he'll be cutting ribbons or saluting army veterans in the future. However I suspect the royal family and wider establishment would think it inconceivable that he could reduced to living off his pension and income from his investments.  He's still one of their own and the idea of downward mobility to the point where he ends up living the life of even an affluent middle class worker would be threatening to the idea of who they are.  As mentioned above, in practice, the queen will pay the bulk of the settlement and he'll be set up for life, but expected to live a 'quiet' life.  However they won't push him to the point where he has no servants. That really would be something they couldn't imagine.


----------



## two sheds (Feb 18, 2022)

I'm wondering how accepted he'll be socially for things like straightforward shooting weekends - I'm sure some of his set will accept him back out of the public's gaze (we've already seen one saying as much).


----------



## Kaka Tim (Feb 18, 2022)

Wilf said:


> Just on the money, but also the previous discussion as to whether they will allow him back to doing duties:  I don't think there's a cat in hell's chance he'll be cutting ribbons or saluting army veterans in the future. However I suspect the royal family and wider establishment would think it inconceivable that he could reduced to living off his pension and income from his investments.  He's still one of their own and the idea of downward mobility to the point where he ends up living the life of even an affluent middle class worker would be threatening to the idea of who they are.  As mentioned above, in practice, the queen will pay the bulk of the settlement and he'll be set up for life, but expected to live a 'quiet' life.  However they won't push him to the point where he has no servants. That really would be something they couldn't imagine.



Im hoping that charles totally cunts him off and hes reduced to being technical advisor for the "Budgie the Helicopter" books.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 18, 2022)

two sheds said:


> I'm wondering how accepted he'll be socially for things like straightforward shooting weekends - I'm sure some of his set will accept him back out of the public's gaze (we've already seen one saying as much).


I've wondered about that too.  There's probably a sweepstake to be had as to who will give him an invite first. It will either be some rogue millionaire, the the 21st Century version of an impoverished 19th Century aristo being dined by a wealth mill owner. Or perhaps one of the loons who has defended him throughout saying 'he's not been convicted of anything'.


----------



## two sheds (Feb 18, 2022)

There's a few people in Epstein's contact book, but you'd imagine most of the guilty ones there would want to distance themselves.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Feb 18, 2022)

two sheds said:


> There's a few people in Epstein's contact book, but you'd imagine most of the guilty ones there would want to distance themselves.


One does need to be careful not to make vile or untrue accusations though


----------



## two sheds (Feb 18, 2022)

I was indeed careful to specify "the guilty ones" - the innocent ones you'd think wouldn't want to touch him with a bargepole.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 18, 2022)

Wilf said:


> Just on the money, but also the previous discussion as to whether they will allow him back to doing duties:  I don't think there's a cat in hell's chance he'll be cutting ribbons or saluting army veterans in the future. However I suspect the royal family and wider establishment would think it inconceivable that he could reduced to living off his pension and income from his investments.  He's still one of their own and the idea of downward mobility to the point where he ends up living the life of even an affluent middle class worker would be threatening to the idea of who they are.  As mentioned above, in practice, the queen will pay the bulk of the settlement and he'll be set up for life, but expected to live a 'quiet' life.  However they won't push him to the point where he has no servants. That really would be something they couldn't imagine.




AFAIK he has that Royal Lodge for life at no rent, cos he paid to do it up with his mum's money. And when Brenda carks it there will be a waterfall of cash flowing down to her four kids and her grandkids. Sadly he won't ever need for anything much. Oh and royal wills are secret, not sure but I would imagine that as a result there's no death duties to be paid on all that lucre.


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Feb 18, 2022)




----------



## Wilf (Feb 18, 2022)

Wilf said:


> I've wondered about that too.  There's probably a sweepstake to be had as to who will give him an invite first. It will either be some rogue millionaire, the the 21st Century version of an impoverished 19th Century aristo being dined by a wealth mill owner. *Or perhaps one of the loons who has defended him throughout *saying 'he's not been convicted of anything'.


Just remembered who I had in mind now: Lady Colin Campbell!  She was defending him in the press, though she might be too much of a loon for even him to socialise with.








						Royal Family Biographer Defends Prince Andrew: ‘Soliciting Sex From Minors is Not Pedophilia’
					

Biographer for the Royal Family, Lady Colin Campbell, recently appeared on TV and defended Prince Andrew against claims of pedophilia.




					wearechange.org


----------



## UrbaneFox (Feb 18, 2022)

Wilf said:


> Just on the money, but also the previous discussion as to whether they will allow him back to doing duties:  I don't think there's a cat in hell's chance he'll be cutting ribbons or saluting army veterans in the future. However I suspect the royal family and wider establishment would think it inconceivable that he could reduced to living off his pension and income from his investments.  He's still one of their own and the idea of downward mobility to the point where he ends up living the life of even an affluent middle class worker would be threatening to the idea of who they are.  As mentioned above, in practice, the queen will pay the bulk of the settlement and he'll be set up for life, but expected to live a 'quiet' life.  However they won't push him to the point where he has no servants. That really would be something they couldn't imagine.


He'll have to start working quietly and humbly on the royal estates, in particular the parts that are cash cows guaranteed to bring in a fortune each year, but badly need the advice of someone who knows sweet FA about farming.

That way, through concentrated hard work, he will doubtless enable the estate to make double, even triple, the profits it has made for the last 100 years, and will receive a few well-earned bonuses at the year end.


----------



## equationgirl (Feb 18, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> AFAIK he has that Royal Lodge for life at no rent, cos he paid to do it up with his mum's money. And when Brenda carks it there will be a waterfall of cash flowing down to her four kids and her grandkids. Sadly he won't ever need for anything much. Oh and royal wills are secret, not sure but I would imagine that as a result there's no death duties to be paid on all that lucre.


I would not be at all surprised if this money now is considered his inheritance and there's no more.

I also expect his servants will be reduced to the bare minimum (and probably the less competent ones at that) and he will be expected to live a very quiet life under the radar on the Falklands.


----------



## scalyboy (Feb 18, 2022)

There's going to be a film isn't there 
I’m waiting for the Lloyd-Webber musical. _The Phantom of Woking _perhaps. Or simply, in the Lionel Bart tradition, _Nonce!_


----------



## Wilf (Feb 18, 2022)

equationgirl said:


> I would not be at all surprised if this money now is considered his inheritance and there's no more.
> 
> I also expect his servants will be reduced to the bare minimum (and probably the less competent ones at that) and he will be expected to live a very quiet life under the radar on the Falklands.


Could you imagine, if you were some royalist flunky and you put in for a job as a butler. At the interview:

'We're pleased to tell you that you've got the job.'
- that's fantastic!
'Do you have any questions?'
- just one, who will I be having the honour of butlering for?
'Ah, erm, well... '


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 18, 2022)

equationgirl said:


> I also expect his servants will be reduced to the bare minimum


That would be none, then.


----------



## equationgirl (Feb 18, 2022)

Wilf said:


> Could you imagine, if you were some royalist flunky and you put in for a job as a butler. At the interview:
> 
> 'We're pleased to tell you that you've got the job.'
> - that's fantastic!
> ...


Exactly.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 18, 2022)

Wilf said:


> Could you imagine, if you were some royalist flunky and you put in for a job as a butler. At the interview:
> 
> 'We're pleased to tell you that you've got the job.'
> - that's fantastic!
> ...


cue 'i withdraw my application'


----------



## Wilf (Feb 18, 2022)

Even though it seems chucky and the bald one have turned against him to defend 'the firm' or whatever they call it, I really can't see that they could envisage a situation where the nonce has to answer his own doorbell or carry his own brew through from the kitchen to the front room.  For them, that would be the true cruel and unusual punishment.  Mainly, forcing him towards anything like the life that 'commoners' lead would be the inconceivable bit, but there's also some bit in their lizard brains that thinks 'if that could happen to him, it could happen to me'.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 18, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> cue 'i withdraw my application'


'do you have any non-sex offenders I could butler for?'
- [checks papers, makes phone call] No, sorry, this is the royal family y'know.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 18, 2022)

littlebabyjesus said:


> That would be none, then.


If it were one, though...they'd have to be known as _the Groom to the stool._


----------



## DaveCinzano (Feb 18, 2022)

brogdale said:


> If it were one, though...they'd have to be known as _the Groom to the stool._


Stool-grooming bring very much an entry-level position within the whole parasite nurture vocational ecosystem.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 18, 2022)

DaveCinzano said:


> Stool-grooming bring very much an entry-level position within the whole parasite nurture vocational ecosystem.


_Bottom feeder?_


----------



## xenon (Feb 18, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> AFAIK he has that Royal Lodge for life at no rent, cos he paid to do it up with his mum's money. And when Brenda carks it there will be a waterfall of cash flowing down to her four kids and her grandkids. Sadly he won't ever need for anything much. Oh and royal wills are secret, not sure but I would imagine that as a result there's no death duties to be paid on all that lucre.



Just an aside. Like your tagline. I had to look her up and read about the tomb / time machine...


----------



## wemakeyousoundb (Feb 18, 2022)

DaveCinzano said:


> Stool-grooming bring very much an entry-level position within the whole parasite nurture vocational ecosystem.


there is a saying about polishing a turd in my line of work


----------



## deeyo (Feb 19, 2022)

the baron killyleagh
the first one of his name
won't be the one who pays for
his truman show of shame

the impact of inbreeding
the earl of inverness
the loot his kin's been stealing
will save his royal mess

the hero of the falklands
his grace, the duke of york
will wash the guilt off posh hands
truth bent like uri's fork


----------



## agricola (Feb 19, 2022)

Going to be a busy weekend for conspiracy theorists:









						Jeffrey Epstein associate Jean-Luc Brunel found dead in cell
					

Detained associate of late billionaire faced charge of underage rape




					www.independent.co.uk


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 19, 2022)

agricola said:


> Going to be a busy weekend for conspiracy theorists:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Fucking hell, looking him up, he had been abusing in plain sight since at least 1988.


----------



## a_chap (Feb 19, 2022)

I never knew any of that and yet I've been a fan of The Stranglers years


----------



## gosub (Feb 19, 2022)

agricola said:


> Going to be a busy weekend for conspiracy theorists:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 Maybe thats what Andre Windor meant about being too honourable.


----------



## two sheds (Feb 19, 2022)

a_chap said:


> I never knew any of that and yet I've been a fan of The Stranglers years


How are the Stranglers involved?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 19, 2022)

two sheds said:


> How are the Stranglers involved?


They're always hanging around


----------



## two sheds (Feb 19, 2022)

with peaches


----------



## Cerv (Feb 19, 2022)

agricola said:


> Going to be a busy weekend for conspiracy theorists:
> 
> 
> 
> ...





> _Le Monde _reported his legal team as saying: “His decision was not driven by guilt, but by a deep sense of injustice.”



eww. could drop the act now that he's not paying your fees anymore


----------



## two sheds (Feb 19, 2022)

they'll doubtless present their invoice to his estate.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 19, 2022)

Cerv said:


> eww. could drop the act now that he's not paying your fees anymore


once they're paid they stay bought


----------



## Wilf (Feb 19, 2022)

Come on Andy, good things always come in threes.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 19, 2022)

Wilf said:


> Come on Andy, good things always come in threes.


Yeh with the aid of some rope he could prove he's a swinger


----------



## scalyboy (Feb 19, 2022)

agricola said:


> Going to be a busy weekend for conspiracy theorists:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The conspirazoids would need to account for Ghislaine Maxwell not having been 'suicided' prior to her trial, as she was surely in a position to name the names of many guilty and eminent persons.

That she has not topped herself makes it more likely in my opinion that Epstein did the same to hisself, despite the oddity of absent security guards and non-functioning CCTV.

Because if there was an 'elite' cabal so powerful as to gain entrance to his cell (and to that of this Stranglers' bass player chappie  ), they could surely gain access to Ghislaine Maxwell. And they could not be sure that she was not going to name names in a plea bargain  - although as it turns out, she did not. Perhaps because she was 'too honourable.'


----------



## existentialist (Feb 19, 2022)

a_chap said:


> I never knew any of that and yet I've been a fan of The Stranglers years


You're thinking of Jean-Jacques Burnel!

That's the trouble with these foreign names: they all look like each other


----------



## a_chap (Feb 19, 2022)

existentialist said:


> You're thinking of Jean-Jacques Burnel!



That was the joke...


----------



## friedaweed (Feb 19, 2022)

existentialist said:


> You're thinking of Jean-Jacques Burnel!
> 
> That's the trouble with these foreign names: they all look like each other


*Isambard Kingdom Brunel  chocked on a half sovereign once doing a trick for his binlids. . *​


----------



## existentialist (Feb 19, 2022)

friedaweed said:


> *Isambard Kingdom Brunel  chocked on a half sovereign once doing a trick for his binlids. . *​


And then invented a machine to extract it again!


----------



## redcogs (Feb 19, 2022)

agricola said:


> Going to be a busy weekend for conspiracy theorists:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


No need to be a conspiritorialist to realise this is as odgy as fuck


----------



## redcogs (Feb 19, 2022)

ive had problems with the 'd' ever since MI6 scanned my lappo 😂
😂


----------



## scalyboy (Feb 19, 2022)

redcogs said:


> No need to be a conspiritorialist to realise this is as odgy as fuck


TBF La Santé apparently has a bad reputation amongst French cons with frequent suicides there. Maybe as a high profile prisoner he should’ve been kept under closer scrutiny, but I still think if there was some dodgy ‘house cleaning’ op going on, wouldn’t ‘they’ have also got to Ghislaine Maxwell before her trial?


----------



## friedaweed (Feb 19, 2022)

redcogs said:


> No need to be a conspiritorialist to realise this is as odgy as fuck


What do you think is dodgy about it? Do you think he was offed?


----------



## gosub (Feb 19, 2022)

friedaweed said:


> What do you think is dodgy about it? Do you think he was offed?


Shut up. You have no idea the amount of souvenir sales you a fucking with.


----------



## redcogs (Feb 19, 2022)

its not impossible he was offed.  Maybe improbable, but the Windsor's and controversial happenstances are never far apart really, cars in French tunnels, dead paedo ringleader in US cells, a list of sinister proportions has developed no?


----------



## existentialist (Feb 19, 2022)

redcogs said:


> No need to be a conspiritorialist to realise this is as odgy as fuck


Not necessarily. A lot of these abusers aren't doing it for sexual reasons, but for power-related ones - because they think they are above the law, and can get away with it. That's going to be true in spades for people who've been moving in privileged circles, and who may have succeeded in persuading themselves that they are beyond judgement.

Realising that - and I'd imagine a custodial prison sentence in a tough prison is a pretty good way of achieving that realisation - is likely to prompt some very disturbing insights about things they regarded as core beliefs. It may even be that he was anticipating further revelations, and more disempowerment and humiliation, and suicide may well have started to look like a reasonable option (as an aside, quite a few of the suicidal people I have worked with will cite humiliation or "exposure", often of things that are actually quite trivial, as reasons to die).

I guess it's possible that his death could have been conveniently arranged, but there is a wealth of other possibilities, too.


----------



## redcogs (Feb 19, 2022)

existentialist said:


> Not necessarily. A lot of these abusers aren't doing it for sexual reasons, but for power-related ones - because they think they are above the law, and can get away with it. That's going to be true in spades for people who've been moving in privileged circles, and who may have succeeded in persuading themselves that they are beyond judgement.
> 
> Realising that - and I'd imagine a custodial prison sentence in a tough prison is a pretty good way of achieving that realisation - is likely to prompt some very disturbing realisations about things they regarded as core beliefs. It may even be that he was anticipating further revelations, and more disempowerment and humiliation, and suicide may well have started to look like a reasonable option (as an aside, quite a few of the suicidal people I have worked with will cite humiliation or "exposure", often of things that are actually quite trivial, as reasons to die).
> 
> I guess it's possible that his death could have been conveniently arranged, but there is a wealth of other possibilities, too.


A balanced assessment


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Feb 19, 2022)

redcogs said:


> A balanced assessment



yes, completely inappropriate on this thread...


----------



## redcogs (Feb 19, 2022)

if i was sat in a cell waiting for a trial whose outcome might throw up further questions relating to aristocratic kiddyfiddling i doubt that sleep would come easily..


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 19, 2022)

redcogs said:


> if i was sat in a cell waiting for a trial whose outcome might throw up further questions relating to aristocratic kiddyfiddling i doubt that sleep would come easily..


The big sleep seems to come quite easy


----------



## existentialist (Feb 19, 2022)

It's also worth remembering, when considering the conspiracy angle, that - and this is something I frequently tell my students - there is nothing anyone can do to prevent a sufficiently motivated and resourceful person from killing themselves. It is extremely difficult to provide a level of oversight that will prevent someone from gaining access to means, and it's probably fair to say that some, at least, of those responsible for guarding people may, deliberately or otherwise, be thinking "it'd be best all round if twatface shuffled off this mortal coil", and negligently (or even "negligently") allow such a thing to happen. And, let's face it, quite a lot of the rest of the world might well feel similar. Personally, I'd rather they had as full a natural life as possible in which to contemplate what they have done, and how far they have fallen, but I'm probably not in the majority.


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 19, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> The big sleep seems to come quite easy


And sometimes unexpectedly.


----------



## redcogs (Feb 19, 2022)

with no apparent reason


----------



## redcogs (Feb 19, 2022)

existentialist said:


> It's also worth remembering, when considering the conspiracy angle, that - and this is something I frequently tell my students - there is nothing anyone can do to prevent a sufficiently motivated and resourceful person from killing themselves. It is extremely difficult to provide a level of oversight that will prevent someone from gaining access to means, and it's probably fair to say that some, at least, of those responsible for guarding people may, deliberately or otherwise, be thinking "it'd be best all round if twatface shuffled off this mortal coil", and negligently (or even "negligently") allow such a thing to happen. And, let's face it, quite a lot of the rest of the world might well feel similar. Personally, I'd rather they had as full a natural life as possible in which to contemplate what they have done, and how far they have fallen, but I'm probably not in the majority.


Completely agree - Brady and Hindley ought to have received the 'blind eye' treatment back in the day.  Objections would have been few.  But i'd have been personally uncomfortable (at least for a short time..)


----------



## scalyboy (Feb 19, 2022)

existentialist said:


> It's also worth remembering, when considering the conspiracy angle, that - and this is something I frequently tell my students - there is nothing anyone can do to prevent a sufficiently motivated and resourceful person from killing themselves. It is extremely difficult to provide a level of oversight that will prevent someone from gaining access to means, and it's probably fair to say that some, at least, of those responsible for guarding people may, deliberately or otherwise, be thinking "it'd be best all round if twatface shuffled off this mortal coil", and negligently (or even "negligently") allow such a thing to happen. And, let's face it, quite a lot of the rest of the world might well feel similar. Personally, I'd rather they had as full a natural life as possible in which to contemplate what they have done, and how far they have fallen, but I'm probably not in the majority.


Both yer Stranglers' bass player and Jeffrey Epstein were very wealthy men, far more than the average con. I don't find it hard to imagine either or both of them bribing the guards to leave them in peace for a half an hour or so, miss a scheduled cell check and if necessary f*ck up the CCTV. They wouldn't have had to spell out: I want to top myself, so how about a few thousand dollars / Euros to let me do so... instead they could just say they wanted a private jodrell so how does X thousand $ / € sound to you lads?


----------



## scalyboy (Feb 19, 2022)

Maybe Burnel was hoping that somehow Nonciamus Sweatamus would win in a legal dispute with Virginia Giuffre (Burnel was accused of abusing her).

If Andrew had managed to discredit VG, it might have given Burnel some hope for his forthcoming trial. Instead, the news that HWCS had caved in and spaffed £12m of UK taxpayers' money in order to keep Giuffre quiet _just for this one year, the Queen's jubilee_ would, I should think, have been very dispiriting news for a 76-year-old man facing a trial for various rape charges. Especially while being held in La Santé, a notorious 130-year-old jail that was described as a merde-hole by Jean Genet back in the 1930s.


----------



## Dystopiary (Feb 19, 2022)

redcogs said:


> Completely agree - Brady and Hindley ought to have received the 'blind eye' treatment back in the day.  Objections would have been few.  But i'd have been personally uncomfortable for a short time..


I don't think so. There was always the chance that more info would come out. Poor Winnie Johnson never got to put her poor little lad to rest but while that pair were alive there was always a chance. And you could say them ending their days earlier would've been them getting off lightly, rather than having to be locked up for the rest of their days.


----------



## redcogs (Feb 19, 2022)

Dystopiary said:


> I don't think so. There was always the chance that more info would come out. Poor Winnie Johnson never got to put her poor little lad to rest but while that pair were alive there was always a chance. And you could say them ending their days earlier would've been them getting off lightly, rather than having to be locked up for the rest of their days.


Aye, no problem conceding the point.  A lifetime prison sentence with the added extras is entirely supportable. In fact i recall at the time making that argument  as an aspect of  general opposition to state executions.


----------



## agricola (Feb 19, 2022)

scalyboy said:


> Maybe Burnel was hoping that somehow Nonciamus Sweatamus would win in a legal dispute with Virginia Giuffre (Burnel was accused of abusing her).
> 
> If Andrew had managed to discredit VG, it might have given Burnel some hope for his forthcoming trial. Instead, the news that HWCS had caved in and spaffed £12m of UK taxpayers' money in order to keep Giuffre quiet _just for this one year, the Queen's jubilee_ would, I should think, have been very dispiriting news for a 76-year-old man facing a trial for various rape charges. Especially while being held in La Santé, a notorious 130-year-old jail that was described as a merde-hole by Jean Genet back in the 1930s.



Perhaps, though I think there was an awful lot of benefit to the other Epstein-associated men from the media focus all being on Andrew.  

HRH was always useful in that respect as he is both essentially meaningless and also never going to be someone who'd be surrendered to face actual justice, so the debate could be kept about how absurd he was or what shit his lawyers were trying to pull rather than straying into anything more (to them) serious.   His settlement ended that for now, so I guess those involved were going to be under a lot more stress thinking they will be the next up to face the music... if not fearful that one or two people going down could potentially open all manner of cans of worms, even cans of worms as obvious as "modelling".


----------



## UrbaneFox (Feb 19, 2022)

DaveCinzano said:


> Stool-grooming bring very much an entry-level position within the whole parasite nurture vocational ecosystem.


Au contraire, many of the dedicated toadying types regard Royal arse wiping as a high status task.

And look, there's Miss Maxwell, again!









						Jean-Luc Brunel: Epstein associate found dead in Paris prison cell
					

Model agent Jean-Luc Brunel was being investigated for rape and supplying girls to Jeffrey Epstein.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## friedaweed (Feb 20, 2022)

Sprocket. said:


> And sometimes unexpectedly.


No-one expects the French Extermination


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 20, 2022)

UrbaneFox said:


> Au contraire, many of the dedicated toadying types regard Royal arse wiping as a high status task.
> 
> And look, there's Miss Maxwell, again!
> 
> ...




Christ, every picture seems to be cropped and when the full picture is shown there’s another rapist revealed.


----------



## quiet guy (Feb 23, 2022)




----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 23, 2022)

quiet guy said:


> View attachment 311516



Been well over 15 years since the Escort went out of production.


----------



## Chilli.s (Feb 23, 2022)

SpookyFrank said:


> Been well over 15 years since the Escort went out of production.


So probably too old for him?


----------



## Part 2 (Feb 23, 2022)

It's actually only 20 years ago and that's a pretty old meme.


----------



## bluescreen (Feb 28, 2022)

Under the headline  *NDA (No Debate on Andrew): MPs blocked from investigating whether public money was used to fund Duke of York's £12m settlement by ancient custom barring discussion of royals in Parliament, *the Fail is carrying a story about (Middlesbrough (which they can't spell) Labour MP) Andy McDonald's  concern about the funding of HWCS's settlement. He can't raise the question in Parliament because of the archaic rule that the monarchy can't be discussed in the House. So he's written to Steve Barclay (Downing St chief of staff) to confirm whether any taxpayer money was used at all to pay the out-of-court settlement and establish that 'no public funds have been or will be used in part or whole in satisfaction of the settlement'.

The article implies that he's waiting for an answer, and ends with the usual anodyne weaselly government spokesman's irrelevant reply to what was presumably the journo's enquiry, to the effect that Andrew is no longer on the Civil List

Interesting that it's the Fail, though. 



Spoiler: broken link



[https://www.dailymail.co.uk/ news/article-10558775/MPs-blocked-investigating-public-money-used-fund-Prince-Andrews-12m-settlement.html/SPOILER]


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 28, 2022)

Part 2 said:


> It's actually only 20 years ago and that's a pretty old meme.


sometimes the auld ones are the best


----------



## equationgirl (Feb 28, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> sometimes the auld ones are the best


Classics, if you will, timeless but humourous classics.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 7, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Regarding where the dough is coming from; Queenie doesn’t want to be seen to pay a rape victim to stay quiet, so she has paid £2m to Virginia’s charity. The remaining £10m has come from a ‘bridging loan’ from her and Charles.
> 
> Will be one of those ‘loans’ that parents give to kids that no one pays any attention to the paying back part. When questions are raised as to the paying back there will be mumblings about the chalet and investments. *Btw, every report on the chalet is no profit will be made on it* and it was bought via gift of cash from mum and mortgage, plus deferred payment of a lump (court case last year for his honourable welching on that deal).
> 
> ...












						Prince Charles 'to loan Andrew up to £7,000,000 to help with sex abuse payout'
					

Prince Andrew has just 10 days to pay the money to Virginia Giuffre as part of his deal.




					metro.co.uk
				






> Prince Andrew is set to receive £7 million from his older brother to cover the payout for his civil sexual assault case against Virginia Giuffre.
> After weeks of lingering questions about who exactly will foot the multi-million pound bill, it is understood Prince Charles will stump up the hefty sum, while the Queen will cover £2 million.
> *‘Once it (money from the chalet) hits his bank account, he can pay back his brother and whoever else has lent him money.
> It is also understood he has to pay the money back to the Queen and his brother when he gets the cash from the £17 million sale of his ski chalet in Switzerland.*


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 7, 2022)

Thought that chalet money was going to pay off a load of debts he already had.


----------



## equationgirl (Mar 7, 2022)

Yes, it is, which is why the bit that says 'no profit will be made from the sale' has been bolded a few posts above.

It's long been mentioned on this thread that the chalet sale won't be putting money in his pocket.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 7, 2022)

SpookyFrank said:


> Thought that chalet money was going to pay off a load of debts he already had.




He bought it in 2014 for £18m, has supposedly arranged a sale this year for £18m.

The original £18m came from a gift from his mummy and a mortgage plus £6m deferred that he welched on, (apparently that is settled now as will be paid back out from the £18m sale).

So where’s the money coming from? The Queen and future king have paid off a child sex abuse victim to buy her silence. It’s a terrible thing for anyone to do, but the current and future head of state, Rule Britannia.


----------



## T & P (Mar 8, 2022)

Transfer button has just been pushed, it seems...









						Prince Andrew pays settlement ending sex assault case
					

A US judge has signed off court papers concluding the court case brought by Virginia Giuffre.



					www.bbc.co.uk
				




I wonder how much of the funds will really have come from non-public money.


----------



## Duncan2 (Mar 8, 2022)

T & P said:


> Transfer button has just been pushed, it seems...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well if it saves the monarchy as an institution it will be public money well spent.......not.


----------



## bluescreen (Mar 8, 2022)

Tbh I thought he'd never cough up. But someone else has, on his behalf. 
Or we all have.


----------



## tim (Mar 8, 2022)

T & P said:


> Transfer button has just been pushed, it seems...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I would imagine it will all come out of the private wealth of the Queen. it's worth reflecting upon how personal wealth she has and time to start thinking about starting to expropriate it for the common good.


----------



## GarveyLives (Mar 8, 2022)

T & P said:


> Transfer button has just been pushed, it seems...
> 
> 
> 
> ...





tim said:


> I would imagine it will all come out of the private wealth of the Queen. it's worth reflecting upon how personal wealth she has and time to start thinking about starting to expropriate it for the common good.










(Source: Twitter)

*Maybe works of art can be sold to fund the settlement.*​


----------



## muscovyduck (Mar 9, 2022)

To be fair it sounds like if they didn't pay out it means the victim not seeing the money, or having to go through another battle to get it. I think if I was loaded due to inherited wealth and one of my relatives had done something henious and was spiraling towards bankruptcy I'd want to make sure the victim got the money without hassle so they could just move on. But then I'm not one of these fucking lizards so who knows

Similar sort of issue to NHS medical negligence claims or when someone sues the police innit. It's our money that's being paid out to victims but what's the alternative solution once it's gotten to that point? Despite what people in positions of power claim, in the majority of cases it's actually really fucking easy to stop people hurting other people to the extent that they end up in litigation over it, *if there is the desire to do so*. But that desire is typically not there because that would disrupt the status quo which supports that position of power in the first place


----------



## WhyLikeThis (Mar 13, 2022)

Dunno if this has been posted yet but…









						The Scary of Sixty-First - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org
				




A horror film involving demonic sexual possession from the spirit of Prince Andrew. 

It’s on Shudder and quite something.


----------



## TopCat (Mar 14, 2022)

Looking like the nonce has got away with it now.


----------



## dessiato (Mar 14, 2022)

TopCat said:


> Looking like the nonce has got away with it now.


He was always going to get away with it to a greater or lesser extent. It’s only the little people like us who don’t.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 14, 2022)

dessiato said:


> He was always going to get away with it to a greater or lesser extent. It’s only the little people like us who don’t.


not entirely the truth. the fall from grace of people like gary glitter, rolf harris, max clifford etc shows that celebrity and fame not necessarily an obstacle to justice. and the royal family have - unprecedentedly - stripped andrew of his public life and he lives now on their sufferance (in terms of income rather than actual life itself)


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 14, 2022)

dessiato said:


> He was always going to get away with it to a greater or lesser extent. It’s only the little people like us who don’t.


Unfortunately the ‘little people’ get away with abuse and coercive control across the board. This type of horror is not confined to the super rich


----------



## TopCat (Mar 29, 2022)

Prince Andrew plays prominent role in Prince Philip memorial service
					

Royal makes first public appearance since settling sexual assault case filed against him by Virginia Giuffre




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Wilf (Mar 29, 2022)

TopCat said:


> Prince Andrew plays prominent role in Prince Philip memorial service
> 
> 
> Royal makes first public appearance since settling sexual assault case filed against him by Virginia Giuffre
> ...


So, you've got 4 kids: Batshit Charlie, Anne, the other one and a nonce who has cost you millions.  Hmmm, which one should you choose to accompany you at the service? Which one will it be?   

Allowing nonces to have a role in public life - _the Levelling Up Agenda._


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 29, 2022)

Wilf said:


> So, you've got 4 kids: Batshit Charlie, Anne, the other one and a nonce who has cost you millions.  Hmmm, which one should you choose to accompany you at the service? Which one will it be?
> 
> Allowing nonces to have a role in public life - _the Levelling Up Agenda._


You're all looking at this the wrong way. The queen bringing Andrew wasn't her showing any affection for him, or bigging him up, or showing they're trying to rehabilitate him. It was so she knew where he was. For that period of time, at least, he might have been a nonce but he wasn't noncing.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 29, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> You're all looking at this the wrong way. The queen bringing Andrew wasn't her showing any affection for him, or bigging him up, or showing they're trying to rehabilitate him. It was so she knew where he was. For that period of time, at least, he might have been a nonce but he wasn't noncing.


I was idly wondering whether the nonce still got his free landrover and a quick search diverted me to this story about him ramming the park gates to avoid a 1 mile detour:









						Prince Andrew reported to police for 'ramming park gates with Range Rover'
					

The Queen's second oldest son reportedly rammed closed gates with his £80,000 Range Rover so he could take a shortcut




					www.mirror.co.uk
				




Thames Valley police came up with an excuse for not investigating that rivals the Met's 'we don't investigate past crimes':



> A spokesman said: "An alleged criminal damage was reported this morning but the caller had no details of the alleged incident other than it was in Windsor on Sunday.
> 
> "The caller was advised that a person involved in the alleged incident or someone acting on their behalf would need to report this."


----------



## teuchter (Mar 29, 2022)

Bit of a weird story that, we aren't told who claims to have seen the incident happen. But it's reported to the police by the head of an anti-monarchist group who wasn't there.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 30, 2022)

teuchter said:


> Bit of a weird story that, we aren't told who claims to have seen the incident happen. But it's reported to the police by the head of an anti-monarchist group who wasn't there.


I take it that the police initially refused to investigate because of the lack of a complaint, implying the event was already known about, at least by journalists. Republic stepped in _at that point_, leading to Thames Valley plod coming out with a different excuse.


----------



## GarveyLives (Mar 30, 2022)

GarveyLives said:


> (Source: Twitter)
> 
> *Maybe works of art can be sold to fund the settlement.*​








*"'Front and centre' as the world watched"*​


----------



## T & P (Mar 30, 2022)

Wilf said:


> So, you've got 4 kids: Batshit Charlie, Anne, the other one and a nonce who has cost you millions.  Hmmm, which one should you choose to accompany you at the service? Which one will it be?
> 
> Allowing nonces to have a role in public life - _the Levelling Up Agenda._


Interestingly, the Mail of all papers is running an exclusive today claiming Andrew bullied his way to walking Brenda up the aisle, to the consternation of everyone concerned.

Screenshot below so no one has to click on any Mail links...



Someone at Buck House was more than happy to leak the story, it seems.

ETA: beaten to it by GareyLives


----------



## two sheds (Mar 30, 2022)

Does that make him king soon If he gets rid of Charles?


----------



## chandlerp (Mar 30, 2022)

two sheds said:


> Does that make him king soon If he gets rid of Charles?


No, next in line is William


----------



## Duncan2 (Mar 30, 2022)

Think it would have to be a full on kind hearts and coronets operation if Andrew were ever to be put on.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 30, 2022)

Who's he flicking the wanker sign to?


----------



## JimW (Mar 30, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Who's he flicking the wanker sign to?
> 
> View attachment 316421


His hand's just frozen in that position after years of self-abuse


----------



## Duncan2 (Mar 30, 2022)

the photo has been shipped to make it look like Brenda has taken his arm.😀


----------



## T & P (Mar 30, 2022)

He's definitely giving someone the evil eye, anyway. A big 'fuck you' to brother Charles or nephew William would be my guess...


----------



## Wilf (Mar 30, 2022)

T & P said:


> Interestingly, the Mail of all papers is running an exclusive today claiming Andrew bullied his way to walking Brenda up the aisle, to the consternation of everyone concerned.
> 
> Screenshot below so no one has to click on any Mail links...
> 
> ...


Not sure how he managed that. I'd have assumed they stage manage and practice every move in those ceremonies.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2022)

T & P said:


> He's definitely giving someone the evil eye, anyway. A big 'fuck you' to brother Charles or newphew William would be my guess...


Someone waving a pizza express menu at him


----------



## GarveyLives (Apr 1, 2022)

*What next?*​


----------



## two sheds (Apr 1, 2022)

Hell of an April Fool's joke


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 1, 2022)

Jeffrey wasn’t my friend, he was Ghislane’s plus one, said one (nonce)


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 1, 2022)

GarveyLives said:


> *What next?*​




Dashed bally bad luck that one seems to only befriend thieves, grifters and nonces. 

Long to reign over us!


----------



## UrbaneFox (Apr 3, 2022)

A brief, failed, attempt at the 'war veteran suffered post traumatic stress' defence.  









						Prince Andrew returned from Falklands War 'a changed man', he says in deleted post
					

The prince recalled his Falklands War experience in a now deleted post on his ex-wife’s Instagram.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## scalyboy (Apr 4, 2022)

Wilf said:


> Not sure how he managed that. I'd have assumed they stage manage and practice every move in those ceremonies.


Agreed. I find it hard to believe he just muscled his way to the front and grabbed his ma’s arm, against her wishes (she doesn’t look too unhappy or dismayed) and defying all the rehearsals.

Seems more likely to me that Brenda stipulated Nonciamus Sweatamius be given a prominent role. She could’ve refused him permission to attend, or allowed him to be present - but on the strict basis that he’d be stood at the back in a hessian sack, or wearing an animal mask (as in the climax of The Wicker Man).

 In that TV series The Crown, supposedly based on fact, it was stressed that HWDNS was her favourite out of all her lizard-spawn children.

So, if it’s true that Brenda insisted her disgraced son (the Prince Noncial) be placed at centre stage during this ceremony, it’s a bad look for Queenie - and further demonstrates how out of touch they all are with real people.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 4, 2022)

scalyboy said:


> Agreed. I find it hard to believe he just muscled his way to the front and grabbed his ma’s arm, against her wishes (she doesn’t look too unhappy or dismayed) and defying all the rehearsals.
> 
> Seems more likely to me that Brenda stipulated Nonciamus Sweatamius be given a prominent role. She could’ve refused him permission to attend, or allowed him to be present - but on the strict basis that he’d be stood at the back in a hessian sack, or wearing an animal mask (as in the climax of The Wicker Man).
> 
> ...


But I hear her popularity among nonces is soaring


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 4, 2022)

UrbaneFox said:


> A brief, failed, attempt at the 'war veteran suffered post traumatic stress' defence.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




All part of his attempt to worm his way back in, rumour has it that he’ll pop up again at the Derby, on the grounds that his mum needs help walking. 

Large crowds U.K. on the Downs at Epsom, a Mexican wave chanting ‘paedo’ as he shows his sleezoid face could enliven the day…


----------



## two sheds (Apr 5, 2022)

New questions raised over Prince Andrew’s award to Selman Turk
					

Exclusive: Concerns were aired over Pitch@Palace contest win for banker linked to over £1m of payments to Duke of York




					www.theguardian.com
				






> Fresh questions have been raised over Prince Andrew’s Dragons’ Den-style scheme after it emerged that concerns were raised over a contest winner who since been linked to more than £1m of payments received by the royal.
> 
> Selman Turk, a Turkish businessman, received an award in November 2019 from the Duke of York at a Pitch@Palace event during which 40 entrepreneurs gave rapid-fire pitches in a room full of potential investors.





> Turk won the “People’s Choice” award for his business Heyman AI, a digital bank aimed at millennials, which later went bust.





> His victory was decided by a public vote online and an audience vote on the night.
> 
> The Guardian has learned that the day after the event, concerns were raised with Amanda Thirsk, then a senior member of the royal household, who said she would look into suggestions that entrepreneurs could game the system.
> 
> ...


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 5, 2022)

two sheds said:


> New questions raised over Prince Andrew’s award to Selman Turk
> 
> 
> Exclusive: Concerns were aired over Pitch@Palace contest win for banker linked to over £1m of payments to Duke of York
> ...


he can't even be corrupt well


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 5, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> All part of his attempt to worm his way back in, rumour has it that he’ll pop up again at the Derby, on the grounds that his mum needs help walking.
> 
> Large crowds U.K. on the Downs at Epsom, a Mexican wave chanting ‘paedo’ as he shows his sleezoid face could enliven the day…


large crowds on the downs at epsom forcing him in front of the speeding horses...


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Apr 6, 2022)

scalyboy said:


> Agreed. I find it hard to believe he just muscled his way to the front and grabbed his ma’s arm, against her wishes (she doesn’t look too unhappy or dismayed) and defying all the rehearsals.
> 
> Seems more likely to me that Brenda stipulated Nonciamus Sweatamius be given a prominent role.


She's heading towards the light. I guess from her POV she can't turn her back on His Entitled Arroganceness as any day now may be her last and her final act towards him. Charles and William obviously see the damage it could cause to THEM in the future but can't overrule her, such is how the system works.
So I expect to be seeing a lot more of him until she croaks.


----------



## two sheds (Apr 7, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> until she croaks.



or he does


----------



## bluescreen (Apr 7, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> She's heading towards the light. I guess from her POV she can't turn her back on His Entitled Arroganceness as any day now may be her last and her final act towards him. Charles and William obviously see the damage it could cause to THEM in the future but can't overrule her, such is how the system works.
> So I expect to be seeing a lot more of him until she croaks.


This is it. I have heard elderly parties say _It's magnificent, the way she forgives him._ 
And, _It was all such a long time ago. _ 
And, _That girl was no better than she ought to be, she looks happy enough in that photograph._ 
It's not impossible that Brenda, being an elderly party herself, has similar thoughts, raised in a different, less enlightened era and anyway believing in her own divine privilege. 
As if it's in her power to forgive anything he did to someone else.
We are witnessing the last gasp of the divine right of kings, and here it is on the world stage, dying before she does.


----------



## dessiato (Apr 7, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> This is it. I have heard elderly parties say _It's magnificent, the way she forgives him._
> And, _It was all such a long time ago. _
> And, _That girl was no better than she ought to be, she looks happy enough in that photograph._
> It's not impossible that Brenda, being an elderly party herself, has similar thoughts, raised in a different, less enlightened era and anyway believing in her own divine privilege.
> ...


One of my sisters says exactly these things. She is certain he's innocent and "that woman" only wanted the money.


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Apr 7, 2022)

dessiato said:


> One of my sisters says exactly these things. She is certain he's innocent and "that woman" only wanted the money.


Depressingly,  I've heard several people express this opinion.


----------



## existentialist (Apr 7, 2022)

ElizabethofYork said:


> Depressingly,  I've heard several people express this opinion.


Yep, I think it's worryingly prevalent - how easily the motives of abuse victims who seek justice are traduced, by some at least.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 27, 2022)

Prince Andrew: Duke of York loses Freedom of City honour
					

Councillors in York vote to remove the honour bestowed on Prince Andrew in 1987.



					www.bbc.co.uk
				






> *The Duke of York has been stripped of his Freedom of the City of York honour following a vote by councillors.*
> The motion to remove the accolade given to Prince Andrew in 1987 was carried unanimously at a full council meeting.
> Councillors also called for him to relinquish his Duke of York title in the wake of his out-of-court settlement with Virginia Giuffre in the US.


----------



## Raheem (Apr 27, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Prince Andrew: Duke of York loses Freedom of City honour
> 
> 
> Councillors in York vote to remove the honour bestowed on Prince Andrew in 1987.
> ...


Seems a bit insulting giving a royal the freedom a city in the first place. Aren't they supposed to have the freedom of the whole country anyway?


----------



## brogdale (Apr 28, 2022)

Raheem said:


> Seems a bit insulting giving a royal the freedom a city in the first place. Aren't they supposed to have the freedom of the whole country anyway?


Not round mine; won’t let the fuckers over the threshold


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Apr 28, 2022)

I've been reading the Heil's article on the York situation (I'm bored), and 80% of the comments seem to be "Well, what about Harry and Megan, then!!?"


----------



## Serene (Apr 28, 2022)

He hasnt even been to York in the last 3 decades, not even Pizza Express. " Its full of northern scum, its not even got a Golf Course." He wont even fly over it in a helicopter.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 28, 2022)

Serene said:


> He hasnt even been to York in the last 3 decades, not even Pizza Express. " Its full of northern scum, its not even got a Golf Course." He wont even fly over it in a helicopter.


scared of manpads


----------



## MickiQ (Apr 28, 2022)

I was kind of hoping he would just fade away into the background and spend the rest of his days in a room on a royal estate somewhere muttering about the injustice of it all but he does seem to be the public eye a fair bit still.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 28, 2022)

MickiQ said:


> I was kind of hoping he would just fade away into the background and spend the rest of his days in a room on a royal estate somewhere muttering about the injustice of it all but he does seem to be the public eye a fair bit still.


it's so we know he's not off noncing


----------



## DaveCinzano (Apr 28, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> it's so we know he's not off noncing


Can't we get him tagged?


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 28, 2022)

DaveCinzano said:


> Can't we get him tagged?


can't we get him neutered?


----------



## dessiato (Apr 28, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> can't we get him neutered?


Bit late, he's already spawned.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 28, 2022)

dessiato said:


> Bit late, he's already spawned.


yeh but better late than never


----------



## DaveCinzano (Apr 28, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> can't we get him neutered?


Did I say _tagged_? Sorry, must've been an autocorrect error, that should have read _tazed in the face, neutered, hung drawn and quartered, then democratically guillotined_.

Bloody phones


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 28, 2022)

DaveCinzano said:


> Did I say _tagged_? Sorry, must've been an autocorrect error, that should have read _tazed in the face, neutered, hung drawn and quartered, then democratically guillotined_.
> 
> Bloody phones


fucking autocorrect


----------



## TopCat (Apr 30, 2022)

Judge denies Ghislaine Maxwell’s bid to overturn sex trafficking conviction
					

Socialite was convicted in December of five counts for bringing teenage girls to the disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Elpenor (May 7, 2022)

Jubilee special pop “tribute” coming soon from the Kunts


----------



## gosub (May 21, 2022)

Prince Andrew to join Queen for Garter Day ceremony
					

The Duke will also be listed with his HRH title in the next day's Court Circular, a move likely to raise eyebrows




					www.telegraph.co.uk


----------



## dessiato (May 21, 2022)

Is there nothing this man will not seed?


----------



## MrSki (May 30, 2022)

Elpenor said:


> View attachment 321531
> Jubilee special pop “tribute” coming soon from the Kunts


----------



## Calamity1971 (May 31, 2022)

Really!








						Prince Andrew should be forgiven over scandal, Archbishop of Canterbury suggests
					

Prince Andrew has been handed support from a high profile figure for the first time as the Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby urges forgiveness in the wake of his Virginia Guiffre settlement




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## Magnus McGinty (May 31, 2022)

Calamity1971 said:


> Really!
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Ahaahaahaa making amends for something he refused to admit. Very good.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (May 31, 2022)

It just demonstrates how the church is a big part of the whole rotten mess. Forgiveness for those rich enough to get away with rape.


----------



## TopCat (May 31, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> It just demonstrates how the church is a big part of the whole rotten mess. Forgiveness for those rich enough to get away with rape.


It was ever thus...


----------



## Calamity1971 (May 31, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> It just demonstrates how the church is a big part of the whole rotten mess. Forgiveness for those rich enough to get away with rape.


They hide their own, so it's no surprise really.


----------



## Duncan2 (May 31, 2022)

You can be sure that someone has put him up to that.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (May 31, 2022)

Duncan2 said:


> You can be sure that someone has put him up to that.




Andrew’s mum is the Old Etonian twat’s boss.


----------



## quiet guy (May 31, 2022)

All jumping on Johnson's party line "Nothing to see here, time to move on"


----------



## Duncan2 (May 31, 2022)

No not even if he were to walk barefoot to Canterbury there to prostrate himself at the altar and be whipped by every monk of the Priory.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jun 1, 2022)

Surely it’s for the victim/survivor to offer forgiveness rather than some arbitrarily appointed representative of a deity? And it’s usually for the benefit of those doing the forgiving than the forgiven.


----------



## gosub (Jun 1, 2022)

If Prince Andrew is involved with  the Jubilee does that mean Her Maj can claim back certain legal bills as a Jubilee expense?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 2, 2022)

Song Called 'Prince Andrew Is A Sweaty N***e' Is Rising up British Singles Chart
					

A song titled, 'Prince Andrew Is A Sweaty N***e' has been rising steadily up the charts.




					www.ladbible.com
				






> As of today, 1 June, 'Prince Andrew Is A Sweaty N***e' has risen to twelfth place on the UK's Official Trending Chart. The song was released under the label Radical Rudeness.
> 
> Not only this, but it's even made the top 10 in the iTunes charts. The song has managed to reach spot number nine, coming in after 'Hold My Hand' by Lady Gaga, featured in _Top Gun: The Maverick._



Go Kunt and the Gang.   



> And it's not the only single to be released by the group in relation to the Royal Family.
> 
> The group shared a 'new National Anthem' with followers ahead of this bank holiday weekend's upcoming celebrations.
> 
> The main message was: "F**k the Jubilee."


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jun 2, 2022)

It was number one on Amazon yesterday (but has dropped to number three) and number two on iTunes.

Plus another 5 versions in Amazon top 30.


----------



## elbows (Jun 2, 2022)

Tested positive for Covid and will miss tomorrows service.


----------



## quiet guy (Jun 2, 2022)

Guardian reporting that Sweaty Nonce is missing his mum's celebrations because he's tested COVID positive. 🤣🤣🤣


----------



## brogdale (Jun 2, 2022)

quiet guy said:


> Guardian reporting that Sweaty Nonce is missing his mum's celebrations because he's tested COVID positive. 🤣🤣🤣


At last, some good news.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 2, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Surely it’s for the victim/survivor to offer forgiveness rather than some arbitrarily appointed representative of a deity? And it’s usually for the benefit of those doing the forgiving than the forgiven.


a so-called deity


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 2, 2022)

I would have thought COVID-17 or COVID-16 would be more his thing


----------



## Raheem (Jun 2, 2022)

quiet guy said:


> Guardian reporting that Sweaty Nonce is missing his mum's celebrations because he's tested COVID positive. 🤣🤣🤣


If only he'd thought of that when he needed a reason he couldn't have been in that nightclub.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jun 2, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> a so-called deity


I took that as a given.


----------



## maomao (Jun 2, 2022)

quiet guy said:


> Guardian reporting that Sweaty Nonce is missing his mum's celebrations because he's tested COVID positive. 🤣🤣🤣


Thoughts and prayers with the virus.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 2, 2022)

maomao said:


> Thoughts and prayers with the virus.


no one would wish prince andrew on anything


----------



## Wilf (Jun 2, 2022)

Might well have the sweats...


----------



## Sue (Jun 2, 2022)

quiet guy said:


> Guardian reporting that Sweaty Nonce is missing his mum's celebrations because he's tested COVID positive. 🤣🤣🤣


That's convenient timing...


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 2, 2022)

elbows said:


> Tested positive for Covid and will miss tomorrows service.



Yeah I think he was probably told six months ago that he'd be testing positive for covid this week.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jun 2, 2022)

Wouldn’t be the first time he wasn’t being truthful.


----------



## quiet guy (Jun 2, 2022)

Expediency over truthfulness


----------



## kebabking (Jun 2, 2022)




----------



## gosub (Jun 2, 2022)

maomao said:


> Thoughts and prayers with the virus.


And the footman that had to spend the last couple of days sneezing around him


----------



## Elpenor (Jun 2, 2022)

Is it too much to hope it’s a highly transmissible and fatal variant?


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 2, 2022)

How did he know he had a temperature?


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 3, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> How did he know he had a temperature?


Someone probably told him he did.


----------



## gosub (Jun 3, 2022)

equationgirl said:


> Someone probably told him he did.


Is in so many ways a positive Prince Andrew story and you don't get many of them to the pound


----------



## Part 2 (Jun 5, 2022)

Ayers road, Old Trafford


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jun 5, 2022)

I suppose he’s used to being isolated now anyway.


----------



## MrSki (Jun 5, 2022)

Edited for bad taste.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 5, 2022)

Nah.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jun 5, 2022)

Not a fan of memes that use images of Giuffre. Spreading images of a rape victim with her rapist for laughs isn’t on.


----------



## MrSki (Jun 5, 2022)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Not a fan of memes that use images of Giuffre. Spreading images of a rape victim with her rapist for laughs isn’t on.


Noted & taken down,


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 11, 2022)

They’re taking the fucking piss.


----------



## two sheds (Jun 11, 2022)

rebuilding his life  ffs


----------



## UrbaneFox (Jun 12, 2022)

Christianity is big on forgiving people, and as your Ma is the head of the Church of England everyone at the palace will be expected to do their bit.


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Jun 12, 2022)

two sheds said:


> rebuilding his life  ffs



Maybe he has long covid?


----------



## Raheem (Jun 12, 2022)

Nine Bob Note said:


> Maybe he has long covid?


Just a long nose, I think.


----------



## Epona (Jun 12, 2022)

I just realised this thread has been in existence for more than 7 years, that is how long this shitshow has been going on, it's fucking shocking (but sadly not surprising) that he isn't in fucking prison yet.


----------



## krtek a houby (Jun 12, 2022)

Epona said:


> I just realised this thread has been in existence for more than 7 years, that is how long this shitshow has been going on, it's fucking shocking (but sadly not surprising) that he isn't in fucking prison yet.



The royal families have blighted lands for centuries. It's almost too horrifying to contemplate how many unfortunates have been abused over that period of time.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jun 12, 2022)

Their entitlements does stretch to accessing lesser beings’ bodies. Always has. 
Feudal Lords got first dibs on fucking the wives before their underlings could. I’m not even joking. What’s happened is their practices are not compatible with 2022 PR. But they absolutely don’t think he’s done anything wrong. He’s a Duke.


----------



## krtek a houby (Jun 12, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Their entitlements does stretch to accessing lesser beings’ bodies. Always has.
> Feudal Lords got first dibs on fucking the wives before their underlings could. I’m not even joking. What’s happened is their practices are not compatible with 2022 PR. But they absolutely don’t think he’s done anything wrong. He’s a Duke.



Can that title be stripped? He's had a fair few taken from him.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 12, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> View attachment 326830
> 
> They’re taking the fucking piss.



Here's the paywall busted link - Palace to ‘support Andrew in rebuilding his life’ as poison prince makes surprise return to public duty.

It's a bit of a mixed picture TBH.



> But today the mood music suddenly changed, with an acknowledgment that the “Andrew problem” needs fixing. In response to questions from The Sunday Times regarding his planned attendance at Garter Day, a senior palace source said: “Clearly at some point soon, thought will have to be given to how to support the duke as, away from the public gaze, he seeks to slowly rebuild his life in a different direction. There is of course a real awareness and sensitivity to public feelings.
> 
> “There is also recognition that the task of starting to support him as he begins to rebuild his life will be the first step on a long road and one that should not be played out every day in the glare of the public spotlight.”



Garter Day seems to be held within Windsor Castle, with only a limited number of tickets are available for members of the public to watch.



> Just how he “rebuilds his life”, what “direction” that takes and how much the royal family play a part in his rehabilitation when the key future stakeholders are so opposed to raising his profile, remains to be seen. Charles has made his views clear, as has the Duke of Cambridge, who considers his uncle a reputational “risk” and “threat” to the monarchy and supports his father’s stance.
> “There is no way in the world he’s ever coming back — the family will never let it happen,” a royal source has said.
> With no obvious means of earning an income and no realistic career prospects, the duke will need all the help from his family he can get.



Then there's this from the Mirror.



> A senior Palace source said behind-the-scenes meetings are being held to find a role for Prince Andrew away from the public spotlight, the Daily Mail reports.
> 
> The Queen has conducted family meetings to discuss a role that her second son could fulfil without a public backlash.
> 
> The source said: “Clearly at some point soon, thought will have to be given as to how to support the Duke as, away from the public gaze, he seeks slowly to rebuild his life in a different direction.”











						Queen 'holds talks with senior royals' to discuss Prince Andrew's future
					

A royal source mooted that one option for Prince Andrew could be to rebuild his life in Scotland now that the sexual assault civil lawsuit against him has concluded




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## krtek a houby (Jun 12, 2022)

Will victims be able to rebuild their lives?


----------



## JimW (Jun 12, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Their entitlements does stretch to accessing lesser beings’ bodies. Always has.
> Feudal Lords got first dibs on fucking the wives before their underlings could. I’m not even joking. What’s happened is their practices are not compatible with 2022 PR. But they absolutely don’t think he’s done anything wrong. He’s a Duke.


Widely accepted to be apocryphal: Did medieval lords have “right of the first night” with the local brides?


----------



## MickiQ (Jun 12, 2022)

I can't see him 'rebuilding his life'. Brenda may have forgiven him but she isn't going to be there long enough for it to matter.
Chuck isn't completely daft he knows that his brother is going to be a major embarrassment to him.
He probably is wondering if an accident can be arranged when Brenda is safely put away in Westminster Abbey


----------



## Plumdaff (Jun 12, 2022)

He's going to get a very important job overseeing the lawn mowing and doing the gin tasting on a Caribbean estate. Still far more than he deserves, of course.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 12, 2022)

Plumdaff said:


> He's going to get a very important job overseeing the lawn mowing and doing the gin tasting on a Caribbean estate. Still far more than he deserves, of course.


Drown him in a barrel of bombay sapphire


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 12, 2022)

“No obvious means of an income”.  I wonder if he’s considered taking on more hours or moving to a better-paid job?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 12, 2022)

MickiQ said:


> I can't see him 'rebuilding his life'. Brenda may have forgiven him but she isn't going to be there long enough for it to matter.
> Chuck isn't completely daft he knows that his brother is going to be a major embarrassment to him.
> He probably is wondering if an accident can be arranged when Brenda is safely put away in Westminster Abbey


There will be a double sized coffin and it'll be weeks before anyone's noticed Andrew's disappeared


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jun 12, 2022)

JimW said:


> Widely accepted to be apocryphal: Did medieval lords have “right of the first night” with the local brides?



Fair enough. I never thought to question it as they are cunts.


----------



## friedaweed (Jun 12, 2022)

Plumdaff said:


> He's going to get a very important job overseeing the lawn mowing and doing the gin tasting on a Caribbean estate. Still far more than he deserves, of course.


He's off to Scotland according to the gutter press.  

There's a bungalow in Glencoe that's perfect for him.


----------



## JimW (Jun 12, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Fair enough. I never thought to question it as they are cunts.


Yeah, not that they wouldn't want to, more that would get them stabbed even sooner however big a bastard. Just remember it coming up before and being told it was a myth.


----------



## dessiato (Jun 12, 2022)

friedaweed said:


> He's off to Scotland according to the gutter press.
> 
> There's a bungalow in Glencoe that's perfect for him.


I'm moving to Scotland this month. This is purely coincidental.


----------



## friedaweed (Jun 12, 2022)

dessiato said:


> I'm moving to Scotland this month. This is purely coincidental.


Good luck with the move mate 👍


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Jun 12, 2022)

I'm surprised they're stupid/complacent enough to try and rehabilitate him tbh. Putting him out in the public eye can only be damaging, especially if they let him say anything ever.


----------



## krtek a houby (Jun 12, 2022)

Have him relocated to the tower where people can lob rotten tomatoes at him. That would be of great service to the public.


----------



## bluescreen (Jun 12, 2022)

friedaweed said:


> He's off to Scotland according to the gutter press.
> 
> There's a bungalow in Glencoe that's perfect for him.


I thought that was set to be demolished? 
(Btw, I reckon they should be using GPR on that site.)


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 12, 2022)

krtek a houby said:


> Have him relocated to the tower where people can lob rotten tomatoes at him. That would be of great service to the public.



Why only rotten tomatoes? I would pay more to lob tinned tomatoes at him.


----------



## pogofish (Jun 12, 2022)

friedaweed said:


> He's off to Scotland according to the gutter press.



I can't remember if I said it here or somewhere else but a while back, I opined that I could see him being given some sort of "managerial" role  for the Royal properties/estates up here. Which would keep him busy-ish and out of the way.

Also remember there is that estate near Inverness that belongs to Brocksbank's family where James Middleton got shuffled-off to several times, whenever he looked to be fucking-up his life-up in various ways.

Some years back, in his "Ambassador for British Business" days, some sort of arrangement was entered into with my work where Andy would be in attendance for a small number of days a year. I don't know more details because I declined to have anything to do with that job but an office was prepared for his use but I only recall him using it the once before everything blew-up and he was stood down.

Anyway, last summer, I noticed it was being ripped-out and there was a pile of split-new carpet tiles at the door, awaiting disposal.

So, I filled-up the back of the car and stashed them in my garage, eventually re-flooring my bathroom and I might have enough left to do the kitchen too.


----------



## friedaweed (Jun 12, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> I thought that was set to be demolished?
> (Btw, I reckon they should be using GPR on that site.)


Apparently there's some local kerfuffle about a planning application to put a luxury home on the site. 



pogofish said:


> I can't remember if I said it here or somewhere else but a while back, I opined that I could see him being given some sort of "managerial" role  for the Royal properties/estates up here. Which would keep him busy-ish and out of the way.
> 
> Also remember there is that estate near Inverness that belongs to Brocksbank's family where James Middleton got shuffled-off to several times, whenever he looked to be fucking-up his life-up in various ways.
> 
> ...



Mad isn't it. The twat'll be fishing the upper Helmsdale with a gillie at our expense in a few weeks.


----------



## pogofish (Jun 12, 2022)

friedaweed said:


> Apparently there's some local kerfuffle about a planning application to put a luxury home on the site.
> 
> 
> 
> Mad isn't it. The twat'll be fishing the upper Helmsdale with a gillie at our expense in a few weeks.



Yup. Some “Retail Tycoon” has bought it and wants to raze it and build a new highland hideaway on the site.

Part of the opposition to its demolition comes from mountaineering groups who want it preserved because before Saville got it, it was the home of Hamish MacInnes - a near legendary figure in Scottish mountaineering. There were calls to have it made into a museum to him from shortly after his death, so there is some reason to keep it.

Even though the Crown Estate in Scotland has been placed under Holyrood control, which hopefully means professional management, there are still a number of Royal properties/estates etc that are either owned outright, held in trust or leased long term by different Royal tentacles that fall outside the Crown Estate - Balmoral being the most well known. In the recent past, Prince Phillip seemed to be the Royal in charge of this side of the family business and there are plenty of Aberdeenshire farmers who counted him as a personal friend becau of their dealings with him over leasing land etc over the decades, so his death may have opened an opportunity for Andy..?


----------



## Dystopiary (Jun 12, 2022)

Seem to remember there was a clause in the payoff that meant Virginia Giuffre wasn't allowed to say anything about the nonce til after the jubilee. 

⌛ 🎤 📖 📢


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 12, 2022)

How’s his old mucker Ghislane getting on these days? That pompous fucking rule book she wrote for staff at her and Epstein’s place, is she applying that in her current accommodation?


----------



## friedaweed (Jun 12, 2022)

pogofish said:


> Yup. Some “Retail Tycoon” has bought it and wants to raze it and build a new highland hideaway on the site.
> 
> Part of the opposition to its demolition comes from mountaineering groups who want it preserved because before Saville got it, it was the home of Hamish MacInnes - a near legendary figure in Scottish mountaineering. There were calls to have it made into a museum to him from shortly after his death, so there is some reason to keep it.
> 
> Even though the Crown Estate in Scotland has been placed under Holyrood control, which hopefully means professional management, there are still a number of Royal properties/estates etc that are either owned outright, held in trust or leased long term by different Royal tentacles that fall outside the Crown Estate - Balmoral being the most well known. In the recent past, Prince Phillip seemed to be the Royal in charge of this side of the family business and there are plenty of Aberdeenshire farmers who counted him as a personal friend becau of their dealings with him over leasing land etc over the decades, so his death may have opened an opportunity for Andy..?


I never knew that was Hamish MacInnes gaff. Another reason why they should have burnt Savile at the stake. I've passed it loads of times as a frequent visitor to Fort Bill.

Nit sure what kind of business man old sweaty bollocks will turn out to be for the Highlands he's like the feces king Miday. 

Shame you lot have ended up with the prick. Hopefully he'll get an Aberdonian kiss on arrival D'ye ken. 

"You can have Scotland, now stop being a naughty boy"


----------



## Cid (Jun 13, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> How’s his old mucker Ghislane getting on these days? That pompous fucking rule book she wrote for staff at her and Epstein’s place, is she applying that in her current accommodation?



Sentencing towards the end of the month apparently.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 13, 2022)

HaHa! 



> The Duke of York will not take part in the traditional Garter Day procession at Windsor Castle after a “family decision”, which will keep him once more from public view.
> 
> While Prince Andrew, as a garter knight, will attend the investiture of new members of the ancient order of chivalry, and the annual lunch, he will not walk with others from Windsor Castle down to St George’s chapel, it has been confirmed.





> News that the Duke of York would not take part in the procession followed a report in the Sun that he had been banned from appearing after the Prince of Wales and Duke of Cambridge lobbied the Queen. Senior royals feared a “backlash”, the newspaper said, adding that Charles and William were said to have agreed to their approach before telling the Queen, who made the final decision.
> 
> Palace aides would say only that it was a “family decision”.











						Prince Andrew to miss Windsor Castle procession after ‘family decision’
					

Duke of York will not take part in ceremonious Garter Day walk from Windsor Castle to St George’s chapel




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 13, 2022)

Fuck me, he really is thicky-McThickFace, isn't he!





__





						12ft |
					






					12ft.io
				






> The Duke of York has asked the Queen to reinstate him as colonel of the Grenadier Guards as part of a plan charting his return to public life, it was reported yesterday.
> 
> Prince Andrew is also believed to have asked that his daughters, Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie, be made working royals.
> 
> Today, as a member of the Order of the Garter, the duke is expected to attend the Garter Day service at Windsor Castle. A source told _The Sunday Telegraph_: “The colonelcy of the Grenadier Guards was his most coveted title and he wants it back. Having remained a counsellor of state, he also believes he should be included at royal and state events.”


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 13, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Fuck me, he really is thicky-McThickFace, isn't he!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


but will the guards go for it or will even they hesitate to be associated with the shit in human form that is andrew mountbatten-windsor?


----------



## A380 (Jun 13, 2022)

pogofish said:


> I can't remember if I said it here or somewhere else but a while back, I opined that I could see him being given some sort of "managerial" role  for the Royal properties/estates up here. Which would keep him busy-ish and out of the way.
> 
> Also remember there is that estate near Inverness that belongs to Brocksbank's family where James Middleton got shuffled-off to several times, whenever he looked to be fucking-up his life-up in various ways.
> 
> ...


Price Andrew's carpet tiles you say?


----------



## clicker (Jun 13, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Fuck me, he really is thicky-McThickFace, isn't he!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


He's desperate . Needs to try and sort out something before Liz carks it I reckon, because once she's gawn he's relying on Charles's/William's benevolence, and it sounds as though they've definitely shoved him out of the nest.


----------



## two sheds (Jun 13, 2022)

He must be pissed off thinking "couple of hundred years ago I could have had any of these fucking complainers hung "


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 13, 2022)

two sheds said:


> He must be pissed off thinking "couple of hundred years ago I could have had any of these fucking complainers hung "


it's a pity he hasn't shared the fate of the prince imperial


----------



## scalyboy (Jun 13, 2022)

"working royal" - an oxymoron 

Let him dress up in a Womble costume sprayed silver and have him stand motionless at Covent Garden for several hours (without sweating). "Working royal" FFS


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 13, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Fuck me, he really is thicky-McThickFace, isn't he!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


prince william has stepped up to the mark and said it's him or the nonce









						William warning scuppers Andrew’s return to Royal fold
					

Duke of Cambridge dropped ‘him or me’ at Garter service bombshell ahead of ceremony




					www.standard.co.uk


----------



## T & P (Jun 13, 2022)

More Royal Family bitter infighting, please!


----------



## MickiQ (Jun 13, 2022)

I think both Chucky and Billy fear the cold wind of constitutional change blowing across the backs of their necks once Brenda has shuffled off this mortal coil. The world has changed these last 70 years Chucky will definitely get his turn on the Golden Seat and Billy probably will but the chances of that not changing are probably improved by keeping Uncle Nonce out of the public eye.  Billy especially is probably a lot more clued on to the fact that the forelock tugging is nowhere as deferential as in was in 1952.


----------



## pogofish (Jun 13, 2022)

A380 said:


> Price Andrew's carpet tiles you say?
> 
> View attachment 327031



I left the stained ones - and gave the ones I took a good wipe before fitting.


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Jun 13, 2022)

MickiQ said:


> I think both Chucky and Billy fear the cold wind of constitutional change blowing across the backs of their necks once Brenda has shuffled off this mortal coil. The world has changed these last 70 years Chucky will definitely get his turn on the Golden Seat and Billy probably will but the chances of that not changing are probably improved by keeping Uncle Nonce out of the public eye.  Billy especially is probably a lot more clued on to the fact that the forelock tugging is nowhere as deferential as in was in 1952.


Absolutely.  They're not making a stand against Andrew's rehabilitation because of any moral qualms.  It's all about the survival of the stinking rotten institution.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 13, 2022)

ElizabethofYork said:


> Absolutely.  They're not making a stand against Andrew's rehabilitation because of any moral qualms.  It's all about the survival of the stinking rotten institution.


it's because there's something he's done beside which the vg encounter looks utterly innocent. there's more to come out about the godoy believe you me


----------



## Elpenor (Jun 13, 2022)

Let’s not forget that his Nonceness still attended the event just didn’t parade in some sort of procession.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 13, 2022)

Elpenor said:


> Let’s not forget that his Nonceness still attended the event just didn’t parade in some sort of procession.



Indeed, but he didn't appear before the public, he was kept indoors like a naughty child.


----------



## tim (Jun 13, 2022)

cupid_stunt said:


> Why only rotten tomatoes? I would pay more to lob tinned tomatoes at him.


If you've got unwanted tinned tomatoes to lob, you can lob them in my direction


----------



## srb7677 (Jun 13, 2022)

It has always struck me how we are raised from childhood on a diet of monarchist propaganda, with stories of kindly kings and beautiful princesses putting on parties  for all the children of the realm. When in reality throughout most of history they were murdering their siblings and torturing their enemies to death, and even today they include obvious nonces amongst their numbers.

The kind of parties for all the children of the realm that Andrew might have in mind would never make it into any fairy tale.


----------



## tim (Jun 13, 2022)

two sheds said:


> He must be pissed off thinking "couple of hundred years ago I could have had any of these fucking complainers hung "



I think you underestimate the utter contempt that people had for royalty 200 years ago. They were seen in the popular media as absurd, decadent and depraved with none of the sentimentality of today.



The pauper, in the 1812 cartoon above, commenting about hanging rich rogues is quoting the Beggar's Opera which satirised the political corruption of the 1720's, so nearly 300 years ago. It portrayed Walpole , the Prime-Minister as a pimp fence and grass.


We're far too soft on the powerful these days.


----------



## two sheds (Jun 13, 2022)

three hundred? 






						A Brief History Of Capital Punishment In Britain | HistoryExtra
					

From the Anglo-Saxon era right up to 1965 when the death penalty was abolished, the main form of capital punishment in Britain was hanging. Burning at the stake was also used in England for heresy and later treason



					www.historyextra.com
				




Ha!


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 13, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> but will the guards go for it or will even they hesitate to be associated with the shit in human form that is andrew mountbatten-windsor?



HM armed forces have never shown any reluctance to lick a nonce's boots prior to now. In fact they've got considerable form for naming them admiral of the fleet.


----------



## TopCat (Jun 13, 2022)

The sheer brass neck of nonce is outstanding


----------



## elbows (Jun 13, 2022)

TopCat said:


> The sheer brass neck of nonce is outstanding


I believe he always had a reputation for being a thick and arrogant bore, so Im not really surprised at the extent to which he wants to reclaim titles etc.


----------



## tim (Jun 13, 2022)

SpookyFrank said:


> HM armed forces have never shown any reluctance to lick a nonce's boots prior to now. In fact they've got considerable form for naming them admiral of the fleet.


Yes, say what you like about the Russian Army in Ukraine but some of them seem to have given up on military deference and have started to take inspiration from the lyrics of the Internationale

No more deluded by reaction
On tyrants only we’ll make war
The soldiers too will take strike action
They’ll break ranks and fight no more
And if those cannibals keep trying
To sacrifice us to their pride
T*hey soon shall hear the bullets flying
We’ll shoot the generals on our own side*.


----------



## A380 (Jun 13, 2022)

srb7677 said:


> It has always struck me how we are raised from childhood on a diet of monarchist propaganda, with stories of kindly kings and beautiful princesses putting on parties  for all the children of the realm. When in reality throughout most of history they were murdering their siblings and torturing their enemies to death, and even today they include obvious nonces amongst their numbers.
> 
> The kind of parties for all the children of the realm that Andrew might have in mind would never make it into any fairy tale.



Who’s this ‘we’? You might have been but I most certainly was not.


----------



## srb7677 (Jun 13, 2022)

A380 said:


> Who’s this ‘we’? You might have been but I most certainly was not.


Was talking about the shite they were forever putting on children's TV.

I was never taken in by it. I instinctively knew it was shit from a very young age. But the inherent propaganda was obvious.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 13, 2022)

srb7677 said:


> It has always struck me how we are raised from childhood on a diet of monarchist propaganda, with stories of kindly kings and beautiful princesses putting on parties  for all the children of the realm. When in reality throughout most of history they were murdering their siblings and torturing their enemies to death, and even today they include obvious nonces amongst their numbers.
> 
> The kind of parties for all the children of the realm that Andrew might have in mind would never make it into any fairy tale.


If you look at grimm and other collections of fairy tales that haven't been sugared up for children they're remarkably dark. Things like hansel and gretel for example. Prince Andrew would fit into them very well


----------



## ouirdeaux (Jun 13, 2022)

They may be dark, but they're hardly critical of the idea of a monarchy/hereditary ruler. Look at the story of the Goose Girl, where breeding wins the day.


----------



## A380 (Jun 14, 2022)

srb7677 said:


> Was talking about the shite they were forever putting on children's TV.
> 
> I was never taken in by it. I instinctively knew it was shit from a very young age. But the inherent propaganda was obvious.




You were raised by TV?  Oh well, explains a fair bit.


----------



## maomao (Jun 14, 2022)

My kid's primary school teaches endless pro-royal garbage. She just doesn't believe me when I tell her they're all parasitic wankers.


----------



## srb7677 (Jun 14, 2022)

A380 said:


> You were raised by TV?  Oh well, explains a fair bit.


Don't be silly. But like a lot of kids of the 70s I used to watch a lot of children's TV. But we got the same fairy tale propaganda in schools.


----------



## TopCat (Jun 14, 2022)

A380 said:


> You were raised by TV?  Oh well, explains a fair bit.


Thatsabit off.


----------



## srb7677 (Jun 14, 2022)

TopCat said:


> Thatsabit off.


The unprovoked cavalier and unnecessary rudeness and insults from a small minority here has been duly noted, but such things say more about those expressing it than their targets most of the time. If I get too much of this from any individual they will just end up on ignore, as one of them is already.

Tis generally better and more effective to play the ball than the man.


----------



## kabbes (Jun 14, 2022)

TopCat said:


> Thatsabit off.


Yeah, it’s absolutely fair comment to note that children swim in a sea of subtle and not-so-subtle monarchist propaganda.  It’s not even the overt stuff that I find particularly insidious, because that is more easily identified and counteracted.  I’m more bothered by the endless assumptions and unremarked-upon customs that act to constantly reproduce the idea that Britain is us and Britain is good and the monarchy is Britain so the monarch is us and good.  It is taken for granted that schools will celebrate the jubilee, for instance.  It’s taken for granted that the the prime minister will give a speech in front of two flags.  It’s taken for granted that the national anthem appears at events, and references the queen.  It’s not just the thing itself, it’s the fact that it is _taken for granted_ that the thing will happen.


----------



## killer b (Jun 14, 2022)

I would be delighted if Andrew returned as a full time royal, and hope the queen really sticks her neck out in the most visible way to assist him in his return. Quite why any of us would want this gift to republicanism to be neutralised is beyond me.


----------



## High Voltage (Jun 14, 2022)

killer b he makes a very good point


----------



## MickiQ (Jun 14, 2022)

killer b said:


> I would be delighted if Andrew returned as a full time royal, and hope the queen really sticks her neck out in the most visible way to assist him in his return. Quite why any of us would want this gift to republicanism to be neutralised is beyond me.


Gotta admit you make a good point there


----------



## A380 (Jun 14, 2022)

srb7677 said:


> The unprovoked cavalier and unnecessary rudeness and insults from a small minority here has been duly noted, but such things say more about those expressing it than their targets most of the time. If I get too much of this from any individual they will just end up on ignore, as one of them is already.
> 
> Tis generally better and more effective to play the ball than the man.


You Ok Hun?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 14, 2022)

killer b said:


> I would be delighted if Andrew returned as a full time royal, and hope the queen really sticks her neck out in the most visible way to assist him in his return. Quite why any of us would want this gift to republicanism to be neutralised is beyond me.


neutered, not neutralised


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 14, 2022)

srb7677 said:


> The unprovoked cavalier and unnecessary rudeness and insults from a small minority here has been duly noted, but such things say more about those expressing it than their targets most of the time. If I get too much of this from any individual they will just end up on ignore, as one of them is already.
> 
> Tis generally better and more effective to play the ball than the man.


if you were to go back and revisit our exchanges you'd see i didn't insult you once, but you thought that calling me a knobhead was the height of sophistication. seems to me you've one rule for yourself and another for everyone else.


----------



## srb7677 (Jun 14, 2022)

A380 said:


> You Ok Hun?


Fuck off.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 14, 2022)

srb7677 said:


> Fuck off.


yeh you're very happy to dive into the big box of insults


----------



## dessiato (Jun 14, 2022)

srb7677 said:


> The unprovoked cavalier and unnecessary rudeness and insults from a small minority here has been duly noted, but such things say more about those expressing it than their targets most of the time. If I get too much of this from any individual they will just end up on ignore, as one of them is already.
> 
> Tis generally better and more effective to play the ball than the man.


Unfortunately there some whose sole modus operandi is this. They'll target people specifically to follow them around the boards to do just this.

Ignore button is your friend.


----------



## srb7677 (Jun 14, 2022)

dessiato said:


> Ignore button is your friend.


I know, lol. There are now two on my ignore list already.

People who have nothing intelligent or constructive to say, and are just on a wind up, are people whose utterances I have zero interest in.


----------



## srb7677 (Jun 14, 2022)

killer b said:


> I would be delighted if Andrew returned as a full time royal, and hope the queen really sticks her neck out in the most visible way to assist him in his return. Quite why any of us would want this gift to republicanism to be neutralised is beyond me.


Imagine if somehow Andrew ended up on the throne.

A republican's dream, lol


----------



## killer b (Jun 14, 2022)

srb7677 said:


> Imagine if somehow Andrew ended up on the throne.


Some Nepal style event would need to happen for this to be a possibility, and I have to say I'd be into it.


----------



## Chilli.s (Jun 14, 2022)

srb7677 said:


> Imagine if somehow Andrew ended up on the throne.


Imagine the Royal Variety Show that could be done...


----------



## TopCat (Jun 16, 2022)

Ghislaine Maxwell asks court for sex trafficking sentence of ‘well below’ 20 years
					

The disgraced British socialite’s lawyers argued that she was threatened in jail and cannot be made proxy for Jeffrey Epstein




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 16, 2022)

TopCat said:


> Ghislaine Maxwell asks court for sex trafficking sentence of ‘well below’ 20 years
> 
> 
> The disgraced British socialite’s lawyers argued that she was threatened in jail and cannot be made proxy for Jeffrey Epstein
> ...




So she has a list of mitigating reasons for doing the things she still claims she didn’t do.


----------



## Part 2 (Jun 22, 2022)




----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 28, 2022)

Maxwell just said this to the court:

For the first time beyond very brief statements such as confirming her name, the court is now hearing from Ghislaine Maxwell.

She says she "empathised deeply with all the victims in this case".

She says her association with Epstein "will permanently stain me" and that it "is the biggest regret of my life than I ever met him".

"I believe Jeffrey Epstein fooled all of those in his orbit," she says.

"His victims considered him a mentor, friend, lover. Jeffrey Epstein should have stood before you. In 2005. In 2009. And again in 2019. But today it is for me to be sentenced."

"I'm sorry for the pain that you have experienced," she adds.

"I hope my conviction brings closure. I hope it brings peace and finality.

"I also acknowledge the pain this case has brought to those that l love.

"It is my sincerest wish to all those in this courtroom that this day brings a terrible chapter to an end.

"May this day help you travel from the darkness into the light."




Her scumbag siblings still maintain she did nothing wrong…


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 28, 2022)

20 years.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 28, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> 20 years.


Turned out nice again


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 28, 2022)

She didn't exactly take responsibility for anything in that statement.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 28, 2022)

Surprised Andrew didn’t pop over to give a character reference for his old buddy/flame. An honourable prince with tales of derring-do in his naval days would surely have swung a lower sentence for her, no sweat.


----------



## maomao (Jun 28, 2022)

When's she eligible for parole? She could live twenty years unless she takes up smoking or something.


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 28, 2022)

The US prison system isn't renowned for increasing prisoner life expectancy.

That said, if she showing good behaviour she could be eligible for parole at some point, if she's not dead.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 28, 2022)

Apparently she got fined $750k too.

But, she's already got an appeal coming up about her conviction anyway.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 28, 2022)

. Nah.


----------



## mx wcfc (Jun 28, 2022)

I believe I've said before on this thread, that now she's had this sentence she might start spilling the beans on the actual abusers in a sentence bargain

They need jailing too.  I hate to say this, but I'd offer her one year off for every ten years each abuser gets.


----------



## tim (Jun 28, 2022)

mx wcfc said:


> I believe I've said before on this thread, that now she's had this sentence she might start spilling the beans on the actual abusers in a sentence bargain
> 
> They need jailing too.  I hate to say this, but I'd offer her one year off for every ten years each abuser gets.


There isn't a secret about who the abusers were. The visits made to Epstein's properties were meticulously recorded. Maxwell will serve time but the high-status rapists she enabled will suffer fleeting reputational damage.


----------



## mx wcfc (Jun 28, 2022)

tim said:


> There isn't a secret about who the abusers were. The visits made to Epstein's properties were meticulously recorded. Maxwell will serve time but the high-status rapists she enabled will suffer fleeting reputational damage.


Obviously I hope you are wrong, and I assume you hope you are wrong too.

We live in hope that she will spill the beans when the thought of 20 years in an american jail seeps in.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jun 28, 2022)

Andrew is now officially mates with a convicted and incarcerated child sex trafficker who he hid behind to make Epstein the 'plus one'. 
Hopefully no way back for any of them but that she is imprisoned whilst he isn't is a sad but unsurprising indictment.


----------



## mx wcfc (Jun 28, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Andrew is now officially mates with a convicted and incarcerated child sex trafficker who he hid behind to make Epstein the 'plus one'.
> Hopefully no way back for any of them but that she is imprisoned whilst he isn't is a sad but unsurprising indictment.


It is, 

Andrew will never leave the UK and is effectively under house arrest in Scotland (he'll live, I know)  (oohhhh, what about the Scottish independence vote?)

we'll never extradite him.  But he's an insignificant piece of shit in the grand order of things.  If Maxwell named a few big US politicians and business people, that would be fun if they got jailed.

and more importantly some sort of closure for the victims.


----------



## Yossarian (Jun 28, 2022)

maomao said:


> When's she eligible for parole? She could live twenty years unless she takes up smoking or something.



There's no parole in the US federal system - with consistent good behaviour, she might be able to get her sentence reduced by two or three years, with the possibility of a little more time off if she takes part in programs to prevent reoffending.

Her other options would be an appeal of the sentence or a pardon from the president, and I don't think even a second-term Trump would be willing to take that step.


----------



## tim (Jun 28, 2022)

mx wcfc said:


> It is,
> 
> Andrew will never leave the UK and is effectively under house arrest in Scotland (he'll live, I know)  (oohhhh, what about the Scottish independence vote?)
> 
> ...


We know, for example, that Clinton and Trump were guests of Epstein. We also have that video of Trump making jokes about Epstein's paedophillia. If there was a political willthere would be investigations and prosecutions, but as Epstein's associates are rich powerful men from across the political divide nothing will be done. Maxwell was prosecuted because she is expendable.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jun 28, 2022)

tim said:


> We know, for example, that Clinton and Trump were guests of Epstein. We also have that video of Trump making jokes about Epstein's paedophillia. If there was a political willthere would be investigations and prosecutions, but as Epstein's associates are rich powerful men from across the political divide nothing will be done. Maxwell was prosecuted because she is expendable.


But Giuffre named Prince Andrew. Has anyone named any of the others?


----------



## mx wcfc (Jun 28, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> But Giuffre named Prince Andrew. Has anyone named any of the others?


That's probably key.  

Makes you wonder the sums involved in  buying off the rest of the victims.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jun 28, 2022)

mx wcfc said:


> That's probably key.
> 
> Makes you wonder the sums involved in  buying off the rest of the victims.


Perhaps 'the others' are all covered by the sweetheart deal. Curious that a son of a head of state would be the fall guy though.


----------



## tim (Jun 28, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> But Giuffre named Prince Andrew. Has anyone named any of the others?


She named Dershowitz too. He is still publicly active.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jun 28, 2022)

tim said:


> She named Dershowitz too. He is still publicly active.


He, as a professor of Law at Harvard, penned the original 'sweetheart deal'. So I imagine he's in the clear. The disgusting cunt.


----------



## tim (Jun 29, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Perhaps 'the others' are all covered by the sweetheart deal. Curious that a son of a head of state would be the fall guy though.


He's not in gaol, is he? His stupidity and arrogance probably prevented him from doing a deal earlier.


----------



## Cid (Jun 29, 2022)

mx wcfc said:


> That's probably key.
> 
> Makes you wonder the sums involved in  buying off the rest of the victims.



I would imagine it’s more paying the lawyers to intimidate any victims.


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 29, 2022)

Cid said:


> I would imagine it’s more paying the lawyers to intimidate any victims.


Sadly I fear you are correct.


----------



## Petcha (Jul 2, 2022)

A fascinating read from the producer behind the Maitliss interview









						New details about Andrew's car crash Newsnight interview are revealed
					

The inside details on how the infamous Newsnight interview with Prince Andrew was set up, and how his team had thought it had all gone swimmingly afterwards.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 2, 2022)

Petcha said:


> A fascinating read from the producer behind the Maitliss interview
> 
> 
> 
> ...



drowning not waving


----------



## Petcha (Jul 2, 2022)

Utterly utterly deluded. Offering to give the Newsnight team a jovial tour of the Palace once they'd wrapped. Given two giftwrapped opportunities in the interview to say he regretted his relationship with Epstein, instead opting to praise him for the doors he had opened for him. And they still thought it went well.


----------



## Petcha (Jul 2, 2022)

It's also interesting that the Queen herself gave her approval for it to go ahead. And they didn't even consult any lawyers beforehand by the sounds of it. He must have thought this pretty blonde woman would be no match for his massive intellect


----------



## MrCurry (Jul 2, 2022)

Any chance someone could quote the article here instead of a daily shite link?


----------



## Petcha (Jul 2, 2022)

MrCurry said:


> Any chance someone could quote the article here instead of a daily shite link?



It's pretty long, seems to lose all its formatting when i try to paste it in. Just hold your nose  it's quite good. the sheer incompetence from the Palace is mind-blowing.


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 2, 2022)

MrCurry said:


> Any chance someone could quote the article here instead of a daily shite link?


Archived:


			Welcome to nginx!


----------



## MrCurry (Jul 2, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> Archived:
> 
> 
> Welcome to nginx!


Thank you


----------



## MrCurry (Jul 2, 2022)

Interesting to read the background story of how the interview came about. Clearly it wasn’t solely Andrew’s lack of judgement, but that his support crew was also detached from reality.  I wonder why the Queen apparently gave her blessing to it going ahead? Hasn’t she always been in favour of saying the least possible, to avoid controversy?

I would have expected Beatrice, as a young person, to be a bit more clued up, or at least more connected with modern society but maybe not.


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 2, 2022)

MrCurry said:


> Interesting to read the background story of how the interview came about. Clearly it wasn’t solely Andrew’s lack of judgement, but that his support crew was also detached from reality.  I wonder why the Queen apparently gave her blessing to it going ahead? Hasn’t she always been in favour of saying the least possible, to avoid controversy?
> 
> I would have expected Beatrice, as a young person, to be a bit more clued up, or at least more connected with modern society but maybe not.


They live in a bubble. They hear the noises from outside but nothing really affects them. They think it's a one way valve of influence - theirs on us.


----------



## Petcha (Jul 2, 2022)

A few hilarious bits from that article. That Andrew actually came prepared with those stories about Pizza Express and his non-sweating, they weren't just off the cuff anecdotes, he must have rehearsed them. And nobody said, 'er, hang on'...  and they didnt run any of it past a legal team. The arrogance.

I also like that the producer was offered one of the Queen's favourite cocktails, a gin martini, to calm her nerves before shooting   What a weird experience, what a bizarre day that must have been. That interview was arguably more damaging to the monarchy than Diana's and yet they had no press officers, no lawyers, no PRs present.


----------



## MrCurry (Jul 2, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> They live in a bubble. They hear the noises from outside but nothing really affects them. They think it's a one way valve of influence - theirs on us.



It’s a lot easier for celebs / royals to not be in a bubble these days, with the internet allowing anyone to integrate themselves anonymously into social media communities. I can’t think of any reason why the younger royals wouldn’t be all over Twitter / Facebook / forums satisfying their curiosity about how ordinary people live.  Maybe we have a few amongst the urbs?!  😂


----------



## danski (Jul 2, 2022)

rumbled


----------



## teuchter (Jul 2, 2022)

Surely the fact that no lawyers etc were present is evidence that the monarchy is a transparent and open institution which doesn't want to conceal information from its subjects. Disappointing that people are condemning them for allowing Prince Andrew just to answer the questions as he saw fit and then face the consequences. That's hardly arrogance - in fact it's exemplary.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jul 2, 2022)

MrCurry said:


> I wonder why the Queen apparently gave her blessing to it going ahead? Hasn’t she always been in favour of saying the least possible, to avoid controversy?


_Never complain, never explain._
Our good old transparent and open monarchy not wanting to conceal anything.


----------



## kabbes (Jul 2, 2022)

teuchter said:


> Surely the fact that no lawyers etc were present is evidence that the monarchy is a transparent and open institution which doesn't want to conceal information from its subjects. Disappointing that people are condemning them for allowing Prince Andrew just to answer the questions as he saw fit and then face the consequences. That's hardly arrogance - in fact it's exemplary.


Exemplary, possibly. Wise, though, it was not.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 2, 2022)

teuchter said:


> Surely the fact that no lawyers etc were present is evidence that the monarchy is a transparent and open institution which doesn't want to conceal information from its subjects. Disappointing that people are condemning them for allowing Prince Andrew just to answer the questions as he saw fit and then face the consequences. That's hardly arrogance - in fact it's exemplary.


if the monarchy do not wish to conceal information from its subjects then all they need do is advertise on their websites their dealings with ministers concerning representations made by the crown about legislation which may affect the foul windsor clan. they can add their archives to the national archives, to be consulted by anyone who desires to. they can reveal the queen's wealth, her investments, her private income. and the same for charles and anne and edward and the unspeakable nonce, and on and on.


----------



## teuchter (Jul 2, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> if the monarchy do not wish to conceal information from its subjects then all they need do is advertise on their websites their dealings with ministers concerning representations made by the crown about legislation which may affect the foul windsor clan. they can add their archives to the national archives, to be consulted by anyone who desires to. they can reveal the queen's wealth, her investments, her private income. and the same for charles and anne and edward and the unspeakable nonce, and on and on.


I expect they would like to do all of this but don't because they know that hot heads on forums like this would start saying they were incompetent and so on. Damned if they do, damned if they don't.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 2, 2022)

teuchter said:


> I expect they would like to do all of this but don't because they know that hot heads on forums like this would start saying they were incompetent and so on. Damned if they do, damned if they don't.


I wouldn't start saying they're incompetent. We've known that for a long long time


----------



## krtek a houby (Jul 2, 2022)

teuchter said:


> Surely the fact that no lawyers etc were present is evidence that the monarchy is a transparent and open institution which doesn't want to conceal information from its subjects. Disappointing that people are condemning them for allowing Prince Andrew just to answer the questions as he saw fit and then face the consequences. That's hardly arrogance - in fact it's exemplary.


Your OBE is in the post, no need to overdo it


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 2, 2022)

krtek a houby said:


> Your OBE is in the post, no need to overdo it


For arselicking like that he deserves to join the royal victorian order


----------



## teuchter (Jul 2, 2022)

krtek a houby said:


> Your OBE is in the post, no need to overdo it


Very telling that you assume I don't already have one.


----------



## Petcha (Jul 2, 2022)

Incompetent?! Conducting a potentially career ending interview with a famously brilliant interviewer without any outside media training/question vetting assistance? as it happens i work for a company that does exactly that and as the producer said, no CEO would agree to doing that without a team of people watching, coaching beforehand etc. This idiot had his 'equerry' there manning the bar laughing about the family movie night later and his dim-witted daughter negotiating the terms.

Bonkers. But couldn't happen to a nicer chap.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 2, 2022)

teuchter said:


> Very telling that you assume I don't already have one.


I know you've an order of the bottom end for brown nosing.


----------



## Petcha (Jul 2, 2022)

Actually, he probably didn't even know who Maitliss was.

I was at an event a couple of months ago, where she was on a panel with various bigwigs, and owned it. But obvs this thing came up in the Q&A which tbf she didn't really want to go into in the detail this producer did and got things back on track. She is a totally class act, he surely must have been alerted to that. He was sweating while saying he doesn't have the ability to sweat.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 2, 2022)

MrCurry said:


> Interesting to read the background story of how the interview came about. Clearly it wasn’t solely Andrew’s lack of judgement, but that his support crew was also detached from reality.  I wonder why the Queen apparently gave her blessing to it going ahead? Hasn’t she always been in favour of saying the least possible, to avoid controversy?
> 
> I would have expected Beatrice, as a young person, to be a bit more clued up, or at least more connected with modern society but maybe not.



Presumably some PR drone advised Brenda that keeping schtum doesn't cut it in this day and age, and it's better to get out in front of these things.

Unless of course, you're as guilty as sin and as thick as a submarine door.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 2, 2022)

Prince nonce probably assumed because Matliss  is a woman he could get away with this one. Serves him right


----------



## Elpenor (Jul 2, 2022)

Reading that article clearly the Nonce of Nonce had surrounded himself with arselicking acolytes and Brenda would let him butcher her corgis in front of her and he’d still be the favourite


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jul 2, 2022)

Others could have applied the brakes although I’m guessing Andrew is difficult to say no to and surrounds himself with folk who act accordingly.


----------



## teuchter (Jul 2, 2022)

Petcha said:


> Incompetent?! Conducting a potentially career ending interview with a famously brilliant interviewer without any outside media training/question vetting assistance? as it happens i work for a company that does exactly that and as the producer said, no CEO would agree to doing that without a team of people watching, coaching beforehand etc. This idiot had his 'equerry' there manning the bar laughing about the family movie night later and his dim-witted daughter negotiating the terms.
> 
> Bonkers. But couldn't happen to a nicer chap.


It sounds like the urban75 postership has more expertise and experience in successfully covering up the misdemeanours of the super wealthy than the royal family does.

Kind of makes you stop and think about things.


----------



## equationgirl (Jul 2, 2022)

teuchter said:


> It sounds like the urban75 postership has more expertise and experience in successfully covering up the misdemeanours of the super wealthy than the royal family does.
> 
> Kind of makes you stop and think about things.


No, I think we're just mostly suspicious and can spot a cover up a mile away.


----------



## krtek a houby (Jul 2, 2022)

teuchter said:


> Very telling that you assume I don't already have one.



Your tagline would be "je suis OBE" if you did


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jul 2, 2022)

Imagine defending a nonce for a wind up. 
I can think of better Saturday hobbies.


----------



## Elpenor (Jul 2, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Imagine defending a nonce for a wind up.
> I can think of better Saturday *hobbies*.


I now see teuchter as a latterday Simon Quinlank, king of hobbies. 

Probably off drinking his weak lemon drink whilst plotting his next desperately attention seeking troll


----------



## weltweit (Jul 2, 2022)

I think Maitlis's interview with Andrew served to show clearly how out of touch he was. The excuses were pretty pathetic, pizza, sweating, honourable, ordinary shooting weekend. And he never once thought of the victims of Epstein although he had a chance at the end to empathise, he didn't realise or more likely hadn't thought of them. From his POV the interview was just me me me. And even though it was just me me he flunked it.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jul 2, 2022)

weltweit said:


> I think Maitlis's interview with Andrew served to show clearly how out of touch he was. The excuses were pretty pathetic, pizza, sweating, honourable, ordinary shooting weekend. And he never once thought of the victims of Epstein although he had a chance at the end to empathise, he didn't realise or more likely hadn't thought of them. From his POV the interview was just me me me. And even though it was just me me he flunked it.



They’re all out of touch really. It’s what happens when you’re given unimaginable wealth on a plate. You have no idea how anything plays out. 
The ruling class messing around with underlings is acceptable to them. They didn’t make a mistake, part of their culture was exposed.


----------



## Humberto (Jul 3, 2022)

The higher you go the 'righter sort' you are gives you precedence. Hence mainly public school boys, or those nasty and venal enough to out-wanker them like Patel. Gives it 'the humble origins made good' veneer.


----------



## krtek a houby (Jul 3, 2022)

teuchter said:


> Kind of makes you stop and think about things.


 Please do


----------



## weltweit (Jul 3, 2022)

Humberto said:


> The higher you go the 'righter sort' you are gives you precedence. Hence mainly public school boys, or those nasty and venal enough to out-wanker them like Patel. Gives it 'the humble origins made good' veneer.


The field I am in private school background doesn't count for squat. A man who went to the local comprehensive not far from where I initially grew up became a divisional director and later CEO. He had an accountancy background and probably an MBA from somewhere with a name.


----------



## Humberto (Jul 3, 2022)

weltweit said:


> The field I am in private school background doesn't count for squat. A man who went to the local comprehensive not far from where I initially grew up became a divisional director and later CEO. He had an accountancy background and probably an MBA from somewhere with a name.



Ok. I guess Johnson and Cameron went to the same school though. After a cursory Google the latest info I can find is that 60% of the cabinet were privately educated, against 29% of MPs in total, which is still an over-representation.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 3, 2022)

~7% of U.K. population is private educated.

So yeah, massively over represented.


Add in the Archbishop of Canterbury, also an Eton prick.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 3, 2022)

weltweit said:


> The field I am in private school background doesn't count for squat. A man who went to the local comprehensive not far from where I initially grew up became a divisional director and later CEO. He had an accountancy background and probably an MBA from somewhere with a name.


A legal name?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 3, 2022)

teuchter said:


> Kind of makes you stop and think about things.


Why not try it? The rest of us would find it a refreshing change


----------



## Johnny Vodka (Jul 14, 2022)

Should be good.



			Prince Andrew’s Newsnight interview to become a film – guess who might play him


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Jul 14, 2022)

Johnny Vodka said:


> Should be good.
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Andrew’s Newsnight interview to become a film – guess who might play him


He does a quite good smarmy villain.


----------



## Johnny Vodka (Jul 14, 2022)

But can he not sweat?


----------



## equationgirl (Jul 15, 2022)

Johnny Vodka said:


> But can he not sweat?


A key question, I feel.


----------



## platinumsage (Jul 15, 2022)

I guess they'll make him wear a fat suit.


----------



## xenon (Jul 15, 2022)

Is Andrew not on 24/7 medical supervisionduring this heatwave  seeing as he can't sweat?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 15, 2022)

xenon said:


> Is Andrew not on 24/7 medical supervisionduring this heatwave  seeing as he can't sweat?



It's in hand 👍


----------



## maomao (Jul 17, 2022)

Newsnight photographer has 'shocking' picture of Prince Andrew
					

It is understood the Duke insisted the picture never become public, but Mark Harrison hinted that it may feature in a forthcoming film about how the BBC secured the interview.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




I wonder what it shows. Did he wank off a corgi? Pinch his mum's arse?


----------



## danski (Jul 17, 2022)

maomao said:


> Newsnight photographer has 'shocking' picture of Prince Andrew
> 
> 
> It is understood the Duke insisted the picture never become public, but Mark Harrison hinted that it may feature in a forthcoming film about how the BBC secured the interview.
> ...


It shows him clearly sweating.


----------



## platinumsage (Jul 17, 2022)

It was taken in the course of filming the interview and "it will be so shocking, especially if it is decontextualised."

I guess he was trying to explain something, so it's probably him miming a sex act.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jul 17, 2022)

If they darent publish it what’s the point in telling us about it?


----------



## maomao (Jul 17, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> If they darent publish it what’s the point in telling us about it?


To titillate.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jul 17, 2022)

maomao said:


> To titillate.



We’ve got this amazingly hilarious snap but unfortunately you’ll not be getting to see it.

Zzzzzzzz


----------



## WhyLikeThis (Jul 17, 2022)

Blackfaced, wearing a Jim’ll Fix It medal, dry humping Euginie while throwing a Nazi salute sweating profusely in a Pizza Express.


----------



## WhyLikeThis (Jul 17, 2022)

WhyLikeThis said:


> Blackfaced, wearing a Jim’ll Fix It medal, dry humping Euginie while throwing a Nazi salute sweating profusely in a Pizza Express.



Does Jim’ll Paint It still a thing?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 17, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> If they darent publish it what’s the point in telling us about it?


The photographer indicates it's about pushing the price up.


----------



## TopCat (Jul 17, 2022)

So they had a revealing pic and got the interview in exchange for an assurance to keep the pic in a safe. Haha!


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jul 17, 2022)

DaveCinzano said:


> The photographer indicates it's about pushing the price up.



The Saxe-Coburg-Gothas will no doubt be in that bidding war then.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 17, 2022)

TopCat said:


> So they had a revealing pic and got the interview in exchange for an assurance to keep the pic in a safe. Haha!


The media group behind the _Mail_ operates a massive picture library where even very lowly employees, if they know how, can navigate through virtual _Raiders Of The Lost Ark_ epilogue warehouse-style repositories of well 😱😱😱 photos which have big boilerplate DO NOT PUBLISH WITHOUT EXPRESS PERMISSION OF SENIOR LEGAL TEAM notes on them.

Saw a few unpublished ones regarding Urban's Cuddliest Cop in my time


----------



## clicker (Jul 17, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> It was taken in the course of filming the interview and "it will be so shocking, especially if it is decontextualised."
> 
> I guess he was trying to explain something, so it's probably him miming a sex act.


I thought it just said photographer Mark Harrison worked on the interview and he had an incriminating photo. Maybe not a photo taken _during_ that interview, but before times? Maybe him having the photo was what  persuaded NoSweat to agree to the interview.


----------



## platinumsage (Jul 17, 2022)

clicker said:


> I thought it just said photographer Mark Harrison worked on the interview and he had an incriminating photo. Maybe not a photo taken _during_ that interview, but before times? Maybe him having the photo was what  persuaded NoSweat to agree to the interview.



That was my between-the-lines reading e.g:

“may feature in a forthcoming film about how the BBC secured the interview” and “There is a lot more from that day that is not yet in the public domain” and “ It was not one of the shots the BBC released.”


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jul 17, 2022)

clicker said:


> I thought it just said photographer Mark Harrison worked on the interview and he had an incriminating photo. Maybe not a photo taken _during_ that interview, but before times? Maybe him having the photo was what  persuaded NoSweat to agree to the interview.



A photographer speaks… 😂


----------



## moochedit (Jul 17, 2022)

I hope he made some backups in case he has a car crash


----------



## brogdale (Jul 17, 2022)

No sweat.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Jul 18, 2022)




----------



## TopCat (Jul 18, 2022)

Bet the nonce will be staying in today.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 18, 2022)

TopCat said:


> Bet the nonce will be staying in today.


he should be out in the open where everyone can be sure he's not up to his auld tricks


----------



## brogdale (Jul 18, 2022)

Don't think he'll be going down to Lewisham today.


----------



## Part 2 (Aug 26, 2022)




----------



## bemused (Aug 27, 2022)

What is curious about The Epstein case is the lack of convictions of men that raped these poor children. The police must have an idea who they are.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Aug 27, 2022)

bemused said:


> What is curious about The Epstein case is the lack of convictions of men that raped these poor children. The police must have an idea who they are.


Its yet another example of the law being there to protect the bourgeoisie.


----------



## MrSki (Sep 11, 2022)




----------



## dessiato (Sep 11, 2022)

MrSki said:


>



Fuck me! I watched that twice because I thought I couldn’t possibly have seen what I thought I’d seen. Fucking hell, he’s beyond words wrong. It’s his daughter for fucks sake! If he does that to her can there be any lingering doubt he’s done that, and worse, to others?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 11, 2022)

dessiato said:


> Fuck me! I watched that twice because I thought I couldn’t possibly have seen what I thought I’d seen. Fucking hell, he’s beyond words wrong. It’s his daughter for fucks sake! If he does that to her can there be any lingering doubt he’s done that, and worse, to others?




Handsy Andy.


----------



## Part 2 (Sep 11, 2022)

There's a better angle of it. It almost feels like he remembers there's cameras watching.


----------



## Ming (Sep 11, 2022)

Part 2 said:


> There's a better angle of it. It almost feels like he remembers there's cameras watching.



That has to be fake, right? Right????


----------



## Dom Traynor (Sep 11, 2022)

Ming said:


> That has to be fake, right? Right????


It's not fake.


----------



## Idris2002 (Sep 11, 2022)

This fucking guy


----------



## Ming (Sep 11, 2022)

Idris2002 said:


> This fucking guy


While examining flowers for his recently departed mum. He's so far above the law I'm beginning to believe he really doesn't sweat. Why would he? He could grope Dame Dick and nothing would happen.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 14, 2022)

In unsurprising and obviously well timed news...









						UK authorities protected Prince Andrew from US Epstein investigation, book says
					

Geoffrey Berman, ex-prosecutor who led investigation in New York, claims his team was given ‘run-around’ over bid to talk to duke




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 14, 2022)

Ming said:


> While examining flowers for his recently departed mum. He's so far above the law I'm beginning to believe he really doesn't sweat. Why would he? He could grope Dame Dick and nothing would happen.


The higher they are the harder they fall


----------



## Lord Camomile (Sep 14, 2022)

I've seen a lot of people say things along the lines of "I'd rather have Queen Elizabeth than a President Blair or Macron", seemingly oblivious to the fact we could easily have had a King Andrew.

Not that King Charles is, y'know, _great..._


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 14, 2022)

Lord Camomile said:


> I've seen a lot of people say things along the lines of "I'd rather have Queen Elizabeth than a President Blair or Macron", seemingly oblivious to the fact we could easily have had a King Andrew.
> 
> Not that King Charles is, y'know, _great..._


Yeh but you can't have queen elizabeth,  they've put her in a coffin. And given that what the prime minister says is effectively what happens - eg in the six counties, during the miners strike, the poll tax, the Iraq war, tuition fees etc etc where is the monarchy actually doing anything Blair and macron can't?

And speaking of the six counties, isn't charles colonel in chief of the parachute regiment?


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 14, 2022)

Lord Camomile said:


> I've seen a lot of people say things along the lines of "I'd rather have Queen Elizabeth than a President Blair or Macron", seemingly oblivious to the fact we could easily have had a King Andrew.
> 
> Not that King Charles is, y'know, _great..._


“You’d prefer President Blair” is such a stupid argument. 

_Oh, you like food do you? So you like eating dry beer mat sandwiches?_

Also, are they arguing against having elections? Because we _had_ Prime Minister Blair!


----------



## Lord Camomile (Sep 14, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> “You’d prefer President Blair” is such a stupid argument.
> 
> _Oh, you like food do you? So you like eating dry beer mat sandwiches?_
> 
> Also, are they arguing against having elections? Because we _had_ Prime Minister Blair!


Aye, pretty much the same discussion I had with mates when I brought it up last night.

While I can't deny I don't always dismiss unelected positions out of hand (but that's another thread...), I do find it bizarre how so many seem to just be so in favour of "random person as our head of state"


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 14, 2022)

Lord Camomile said:


> Aye, pretty much the same discussion I had with mates when I brought it up last night.
> 
> While I can't deny I don't always dismiss unelected positions out of hand (but that's another thread...), I do find it bizarre how so many seem to just be so in favour of "random person as our head of state"


There’s no need for the head of state to be separate from the head of government.  It could be the same person. Indeed, maybe try having no head of state.  The argument “they don’t really do anything, it’s just symbolic” isn’t really the argument for retaining the post that people seem to think it is…


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 14, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> There’s no need for the head of state to be separate from the head of government.  It could be the same person. Indeed, maybe try having no head of state.  The argument “they don’t really do anything, it’s just symbolic” isn’t really the argument for retaining the post that people seem to think it is…


They do do lots of things, eg protect their own interests by lobbying, generally successfully, for laws not to apply to them.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 14, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> There’s no need for the head of state to be separate from the head of government.  It could be the same person. Indeed, maybe try having no head of state.  The argument “they don’t really do anything, it’s just symbolic” isn’t really the argument for retaining the post that people seem to think it is…


There's an argument for having a head of state who isn't government, though, as they are the one that is charged with ensuring the government stays within its constitutional limits. And the UK head of state's lack of legitimacy undermines any idea that they might be able to fulfil that role. 

One of the non-arguments against republicanism in the uk is along the 'we don't want President Blair' lines. But the UK's parliamentary system wouldn't lend itself to that anyway. Plenty of countries have elected constitutional presidents who most people outside those countries couldn't name. Can you name the German president or the Italian president? I can't.


----------



## two sheds (Sep 14, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh but you can't have queen elizabeth,  they've put her in a coffin.


It would have been the ultimate sign of respect to keep her as our beloved queen and just wheel the coffin round when she had duties of state.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 14, 2022)

littlebabyjesus said:


> There's an argument for having a head of state who isn't government, though, as they are the one that is charged with ensuring the government stays within its constitutional limits. And the UK head of state's lack of legitimacy undermines any idea that they might be able to fulfil that role.
> 
> One of the non-arguments against republicanism in the uk is along the 'we don't want President Blair' lines. But the UK's parliamentary system wouldn't lend itself to that anyway. Plenty of countries have elected constitutional presidents who most people outside those countries couldn't name. Can you name the German president or the Italian president? I can't.


The problem with your analysis is that it's not the King's role to keep his majesty's government in its constitutional limits. It's really quite the other way round.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 14, 2022)

two sheds said:


> It would have been the ultimate sign of respect to keep her as our beloved queen and just wheel the coffin round when she had duties of state.


Followed by Charles, dressed as a corgi


----------



## Lord Camomile (Sep 14, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> There’s no need for the head of state to be separate from the head of government.  It could be the same person. Indeed, maybe try having no head of state.  The argument “they don’t really do anything, it’s just symbolic” isn’t really the argument for retaining the post that people seem to think it is…


Good lord, I do love a good "that's really not the argument you think it is..." retort 

And yup, also came up last night, people who claim the monarch has no 'political' power but then want to credit them with X, Y, Z achievements based on utilising their cultural importance and influence.

(Apols, probably veering into the territory of one of the other threads at this point)


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 14, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> The problem with your analysis is that it's not the King's role to keep his majesty's government in its constitutional limits. It's really quite the other way round.


Indeed. “Glorious” Revolution and Bill of Rights and all that.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Sep 14, 2022)

And they're doing a piss poor job of it!


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 14, 2022)

In case people are missing it in the welter of royal threads, Charles has appointed Andrew as one of his “deputy kings” for when Charles is sick or out of the country. So there’s that.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 14, 2022)

Can we just have a think about that. The spin was that Charles was one of the ones trying to get Andrew to step back from a “front line” role.  Turns out not to have been true. Imagine.


----------



## Bingoman (Sep 14, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> Followed by Charles, dressed as a corgi


Now that would be an image


----------



## teuchter (Sep 14, 2022)

Prince Charles doesn't have any say in it though does he? It's determined by rules set out in some Act or other.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 14, 2022)

teuchter said:


> Prince Charles doesn't have any say in it though does he? It's determined by rules set out in some Act or other.


He was only following rules.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 14, 2022)

teuchter said:


> Prince Charles doesn't have any say in it though does he? It's determined by rules set out in some Act or other.



It's King Charles now, do try to keep up at the back.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 14, 2022)

cupid_stunt said:


> It's King Charles


Spaniel.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 14, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> Spaniel.



Yeah, I've found myself calling him King Spaniel.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 14, 2022)

cupid_stunt said:


> Yeah, I've found myself calling him King Spaniel.


Elton, as is traditional, is releasing a reworded version of an old hit.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 14, 2022)

teuchter said:


> Prince Charles doesn't have any say in it though does he? It's determined by rules set out in some Act or other.


BBC version was he was stepping back from public life.

‘Prince Andrew's public life is over for now. The statement says the withdrawal is "for the foreseeable future".’









						Prince Andrew stepping back from royal duties
					

The duke says his association with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein has “become a major disruption to my family's work”.



					www.bbc.co.uk
				




If he remained as counsellor of state, that wasn’t true.  If he only recently returned as counsellor of state, then the rules can be overridden.

It seems, and I’m not an expert on the workings of the British Monarchy, he was his auld Mum’s counsellor of state from 19 February 1981 – 8 September 2022.  So the stepping back from public life seems to have been a falsehood, a fabrication, a circumlocution, a dirty lie.


----------



## teuchter (Sep 14, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> He was only following rules.


Yes, the law set by parliament in fact. It seems that the argument should be with parliament rather than KC.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 14, 2022)

teuchter said:


> Yes, the law set by parliament in fact. It seems that the argument should be with parliament rather than KC.


Who are always keen to help sex offenders and paedophiles.


----------



## Duncan2 (Sep 14, 2022)

He could hardly step into the shoes of the King if there was a chance of him facing arrest and extradition to the US.That would be nuts


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 14, 2022)

Duncan2 said:


> He could hardly step into the shoes of the King if there was a chance of him facing arrest and extradition to the US.That would be nuts


I've written to Bill burns c/o the cia, George Bush center for intelligence, to ask if he could arrange a rendition for The Nonce


----------



## T & P (Sep 14, 2022)




----------



## Dystopiary (Sep 14, 2022)

Exactly this:


----------



## cesare (Sep 14, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> Can we just have a think about that. The spin was that Charles was one of the ones trying to get Andrew to step back from a “front line” role.  Turns out not to have been true. Imagine.


If we think Peston's got it right


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 14, 2022)

teuchter said:


> Yes, the law set by parliament in fact. It seems that the argument should be with parliament rather than KC.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 14, 2022)

Lord Camomile said:


> I've seen a lot of people say things along the lines of "I'd rather have Queen Elizabeth than a President Blair or Macron", seemingly oblivious to the fact we could easily have had a King Andrew.
> 
> Not that King Charles is, y'know, _great..._



If it weren't for that Simpson unit we'd have had a nazi king.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 14, 2022)

SpookyFrank said:


> If it weren't for that Simpson unit we'd have had a nazi king.


For 12 months the UK did have a nazi (sympathiser) king


----------



## bmd (Sep 14, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> Can we just have a think about that. The spin was that Charles was one of the ones trying to get Andrew to step back from a “front line” role.  Turns out not to have been true. Imagine.



Hard to believe.


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Sep 14, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> In case people are missing it in the welter of royal threads, Charles has appointed Andrew as one of his “deputy kings” for when Charles is sick or out of the country. So there’s that.



Now I'm sure I've mentioned it before, but if anything happens to William Wales before his firstborn is 21, then as soon as King Sausage Fingers succumbs to one of the health conditions he clearly has, Great Uncle Andrew will be Prince Regent.


----------



## belboid (Sep 14, 2022)

Nine Bob Note said:


> Now I'm sure I've mentioned it before, but if anything happens to William Wales before his firstborn is 21, then as soon as King Sausage Fingers succumbs to one of the health conditions he clearly has, Great Uncle Andrew will be Prince Regent.


No he won’t. Harry & his offspring are still ahead of Andy.  You can’t resign from the line of succession.


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Sep 14, 2022)

belboid said:


> No he won’t. Harry & his offspring are still ahead of Andy.  You can’t resign from the line of succession.



Having a regent who lives in California would seem somewhat self-defeating. If they'd stayed in Canada on the other hand...


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 14, 2022)

cesare said:


> If we think Peston's got it right


He’s not got it wrong, but he may have the emphasis wrong, and in doing so missed the better story.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Sep 14, 2022)

belboid said:


> No he won’t. Harry & his offspring are still ahead of Andy.  You can’t resign from the line of succession.


Preeeeeetty sure you can just say "no, thanks".

Just three posts above yours is an example of someone who did pretty much exactly that.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 14, 2022)

.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 15, 2022)

Lol I didn't even mean to send that, I was just meandering in my head


----------



## Humberto (Sep 15, 2022)

I'm pissed too (getting there)


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 15, 2022)

Humberto said:


> I'm pissed too (getting there)


Glad to see you are still functioning on some level Humberto 

I'm not actually drunk today, so no excuse


----------



## Humberto (Sep 15, 2022)

5d chess me 🎩
🧐


----------



## Humberto (Sep 15, 2022)

Asda is shut on Monday hehe


----------



## Humberto (Sep 15, 2022)

Until 5pm but still.


----------



## belboid (Sep 15, 2022)

Lord Camomile said:


> Preeeeeetty sure you can just say "no, thanks".
> 
> Just three posts above yours is an example of someone who did pretty much exactly that.


He _could_, but he is not obliged to.

Peston is wrong, in that Chuck hasn’t actively appointed anyone (& there is no such post as ‘deputy king’). The five under consideration for a regency are determined by act of parliament (Regency Act 1937).  Saying you want to step back or being a paedophile makes no difference.  And camilla is first in line.

The current members of the royal family eligible to serve as Counsellors of State are:

HM Queen Camilla, The Queen Consort
1. HRH The Prince of Wales
2. HRH The Duke of Sussex
3. The Duke of York
4. HRH The Princess Beatrice, Mrs. Edoardo Mapelli Mozzi


----------



## two sheds (Sep 15, 2022)

which is the paedo? I lose track


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Sep 15, 2022)

belboid said:


> He _could_, but he is not obliged to.



i'm no expert on this sort of thing, but not sure there's any recent (as in the last few hundred years) precedent of anyone declining to become monarch, or renouncing their place in the line of succession.

edward 8 was king for nearly a year - he didn't get as far as a coronation ceremony, but was still king, and he then abdicated, so they made up the 'duke of windsor' title for him.  
i'm sure that the establishment could come up with something (or re-create the duke of windsor title?) if someone near enough to the throne to be seriously likely to get it really didn't want to - or could that person still get out of it by converting to being a roman catholic?  (or marrying a catholic?)  

if it's all subject to an act of parliament, then a new act could get shoved through if there was an emergency - presume the 1937 act was because elizabeth and margaret were very young when their dad got the job, and presume they rigged it so edward wouldn't have got to be regent if anything had happened to king george...


----------



## belboid (Sep 15, 2022)

Puddy_Tat said:


> if it's all subject to an act of parliament, then a new act could get shoved through if there was an emergency - presume the 1937 act was because elizabeth and margaret were very young when their dad got the job, and presume they rigged it so edward wouldn't have got to be regent if anything had happened to king george...


Not sure about the whys & wherefores of the 1937 Act, but a bit further googling (ie looking at the wiki page) says the current order of precedence is due to the _1953 _Act. And there had been another inbetween. So it _is _all subject to Act of Parliament and there has been a new one for each new monarch for a century.  So the current government could legislate to remove the paedo.

Although Other Liz would probably put herself into his place.


----------



## spring-peeper (Sep 15, 2022)

belboid said:


> The current members of the royal family eligible to serve as Counsellors of State are:
> 
> HM Queen Camilla, The Queen Consort
> 1. HRH The Prince of Wales
> ...



I fixed your list for you 

Harry is not longer a Royal Highness.


----------



## bcuster (Sep 15, 2022)

Whatever happened to fergie?


----------



## belboid (Sep 15, 2022)

bcuster said:


> Whatever happened to fergie?


As a divorcee of Paedo, irrelevant.

Tho that does make me think.....

If Charles, Camilla and all their offspring die, and Harry is incapacitated. Megan becomes Queen.

We have just under 9 years to make it happen.


----------



## Dom Traynor (Sep 15, 2022)

belboid said:


> As a divorcee of Paedo, irrelevant.
> 
> Tho that does make me think.....
> 
> ...


Yas kween let's do it


----------



## spring-peeper (Sep 15, 2022)

bcuster said:


> Whatever happened to fergie?




She got the corgis.


----------



## spring-peeper (Sep 15, 2022)

belboid said:


> As a divorcee of Paedo, irrelevant.
> 
> Tho that does make me think.....
> 
> ...




Why nine years?

Me-gain will never be queen.

If something happens to Harry, Archie is next in line.


----------



## Boris Sprinkler (Sep 15, 2022)

Nine Bob Note said:


> Now I'm sure I've mentioned it before, but if anything happens to William Wales before his firstborn is 21, then as soon as King Sausage Fingers succumbs to one of the health conditions he clearly has, Great Uncle Andrew will be Prince Regent.


I really hope this happens. Because maybe then people will figure out they don't need to accept a royal family.
Unfortunately.  People will just accept it.  There might be a couple that say not my king or something. But the majority will always do what their "betters" tell them. Thats why I feel sorry for the UK.


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Sep 15, 2022)

Boris Sprinkler said:


> I really hope this happens. Because maybe then people will figure out they don't need to accept a royal family.
> Unfortunately.  People will just accept it.  There might be a couple that say not my king or something. But the majority will always do what their "betters" tell them. Thats why I have no respect for the UK.


Depressing seeing so many people being told how to feel about the whole stinking rotten institution by the media.  Even more depressing seeing people happily going along with it.


----------



## moochedit (Sep 15, 2022)

bcuster said:


> Whatever happened to fergie?


I think i read somewhere that Fergie got back together with the sweaty nonce a few years back and lives with him again although they haven't remarried.


----------



## dessiato (Sep 15, 2022)

moochedit said:


> I think i read somewhere that Fergie got back together with the sweaty nonce a few years back and lives with him again although they haven't remarried.


That rings a bell, it’d  also fit in with HWCS getting a couple of the dogs.


----------



## Cid (Sep 15, 2022)

belboid said:


> Not sure about the whys & wherefores of the 1937 Act, but a bit further googling (ie looking at the wiki page) says the current order of precedence is due to the _1953 _Act. And there had been another inbetween. So it _is _all subject to Act of Parliament and there has been a new one for each new monarch for a century.  So the current government could legislate to remove the paedo.
> 
> Although Other Liz would probably put herself into his place.



The newer acts mostly tidy up odd discrepancies and attempt to bring the monarchy into the modern world (e.g 2013 ends male primogeniture). Notable in the 1953 act is that it brings the Queen Mother in as a counsellor of state, so there is precedent for varying the cos, albeit by act of parliament. The second point is that, far as I can tell, the cos isn't actually compulsory (it _may_ be appointed by letters patent). How that would play out in the real world I don't really know, but it's there. The final point is that it's fairly clear (from 1953) that there are methods for removal from the cos (Queen mother must have displaced someone after all), and that that request can come from the sovereign. Would it be awkward? yeah... But Charles absolutely has a hand in his brother's position.


----------



## Cid (Sep 15, 2022)

spring-peeper said:


> Why nine years?
> 
> Me-gain will never be queen.
> 
> If something happens to Harry, Archie is next in line.



She would be queen regent I think... Archie is too young to be king, so she would act as the monarch until he was of age. Queen is an odd one, not quite the same as king (yet), e.g you can be queen consort but not king consort; you can be queen regent, but e.g the old racist would be prince regent if acting for Brenda.

Also 'me-gain' what kind of weird shit is that?


----------



## Lord Camomile (Sep 15, 2022)

belboid said:


> You can’t resign from the line of succession.





belboid said:


> He _could_


 

(Never said he was obliged to, simply saying that you can, in fact, resign from the line of succession)


----------



## moochedit (Sep 15, 2022)

dessiato said:


> That rings a bell, it’d  also fit in with HWCS getting a couple of the dogs.


Sorry HWCS??? ( I assume it means sweaty nonce and/or fergie but i can't figure it out  )


----------



## bluescreen (Sep 15, 2022)

moochedit said:


> Sorry HWCS??? ( I assume it means sweaty nonce and/or fergie but i can't figure it out  )


He who cannot sweat


----------



## moochedit (Sep 15, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> He who cannot sweat


Cheers


----------



## Wilf (Sep 15, 2022)

teuchter said:


> Yes, the law set by parliament in fact. It seems that the argument should be with parliament rather than KC.


What I don't understand is why Anne isn't higher up the succession list (she's 16 and the beast is 8). Isn't she older than Paedipus Rex?


----------



## moochedit (Sep 15, 2022)

Wilf said:


> What I don't understand is why Anne isn't higher up the succession list (she's 16 and the beast is 8). Isn't she older than Paedipus Rex?


Used to be that men outranked women. Law changed a few years ago but only for new births.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 15, 2022)

moochedit said:


> Used to be that men outranked women. Law changed a few years ago but only for new births.


Ah, cheers. I knew about the change, just hadn't twigged it was new births only.


----------



## Aladdin (Sep 15, 2022)

Wilf said:


> What I don't understand is why Anne isn't higher up the succession list (she's 16 and the beast is 8). Isn't she older than Paedipus Rex?


My 83 yr old mum (who seems to know an inordinate amount about the royals 🤔) said to me that Prince Philip allegedly used to say he wished Ann had been a boy and born before Charles as she would have made a great monarch. 

Dunno how accurate that is...but...mum surprised me with her knowledge of the firm. Mind you....she also surprises me regularly with her knowledge of republicanism and the IRA.... 😀


----------



## Elpenor (Sep 15, 2022)

Aladdin said:


> My 83 yr old mum (who seems to know an inordinate amount about the royals 🤔) said to me that Prince Philip allegedly used to say he wished Ann had been a boy and born before Charles as she would have made a great monarch.
> 
> Dunno how accurate that is...but...mum surprised me with her knowledge of the firm. Mind you....she also surprises me regularly with her knowledge of republicanism and the IRA.... 😀


I’ve heard that before and don’t know how true it is. But from watching The Crown I can say that her character comes across as more capable at more or less everything.


----------



## Bingoman (Sep 15, 2022)

spring-peeper said:


> Why nine years?
> 
> Me-gain will never be queen.
> 
> If something happens to Harry, Archie is next in line.


Would that mean Meghan would have to give a Christmas Speech?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 15, 2022)

Bingoman said:


> Would that mean Meghan would have to give a Christmas Speech?


not to mention easter, diwali, eid, hanukkah etc


----------



## Bingoman (Sep 15, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> not to mention easter, diwali, eid, hanukkah etc


Will she get time for a holiday aswell


----------



## Tanya1982 (Sep 15, 2022)

Barring any future court cases, I hope this is the last we have to see or hear of Andrew. It's already been too much - obviously he has to be at the funeral itself, but there was no need for him to be marching around the streets. 

That at least one person has already been arrested and charged, having first been assaulted, because of Andrew flaunting himself and his untouchability, is an insult. If he had any decency, he'd insist they let the guy off.

Still, if anyone else needs to serve him with legal papers and not get the stonewalling and general dishonest game of hide and seek that Virginia Guiffre got for months on end, they know exactly where he'll be on Monday.

A family friend of ours was in a US correctional facility while her mother was dying - she was given the choice of one chaperoned afternoon home visit with her mother before death _or_ going to the funeral - but not both.


----------



## Idris2002 (Sep 15, 2022)

belboid said:


> He _could_, but he is not obliged to.
> 
> Peston is wrong, in that Chuck hasn’t actively appointed anyone (& there is no such post as ‘deputy king’). The five under consideration for a regency are determined by act of parliament (Regency Act 1937).  Saying you want to step back or being a paedophile makes no difference.  And camilla is first in line.
> 
> ...





Puddy_Tat said:


> i'm no expert on this sort of thing, but not sure there's any recent (as in the last few hundred years) precedent of anyone declining to become monarch, or renouncing their place in the line of succession.
> 
> edward 8 was king for nearly a year - he didn't get as far as a coronation ceremony, but was still king, and he then abdicated, so they made up the 'duke of windsor' title for him.
> i'm sure that the establishment could come up with something (or re-create the duke of windsor title?) if someone near enough to the throne to be seriously likely to get it really didn't want to - or could that person still get out of it by converting to being a roman catholic?  (or marrying a catholic?)
> ...





belboid said:


> Not sure about the whys & wherefores of the 1937 Act, but a bit further googling (ie looking at the wiki page) says the current order of precedence is due to the _1953 _Act. And there had been another inbetween. So it _is _all subject to Act of Parliament and there has been a new one for each new monarch for a century.  So the current government could legislate to remove the paedo.
> 
> Although Other Liz would probably put herself into his place.





spring-peeper said:


> I fixed your list for you
> 
> Harry is not longer a Royal Highness.





Cid said:


> The newer acts mostly tidy up odd discrepancies and attempt to bring the monarchy into the modern world (e.g 2013 ends male primogeniture). Notable in the 1953 act is that it brings the Queen Mother in as a counsellor of state, so there is precedent for varying the cos, albeit by act of parliament. The second point is that, far as I can tell, the cos isn't actually compulsory (it _may_ be appointed by letters patent). How that would play out in the real world I don't really know, but it's there. The final point is that it's fairly clear (from 1953) that there are methods for removal from the cos (Queen mother must have displaced someone after all), and that that request can come from the sovereign. Would it be awkward? yeah... But Charles absolutely has a hand in his brother's position.


Great stuff guys!


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 15, 2022)

Tanya1982 said:


> *If he had any decency*, he'd insist they let the guy off.




lolz


----------



## killer b (Sep 15, 2022)

Elpenor said:


> But from watching The Crown I can say


Fairly sure a Netflix drama is probably not the most reliable source of data on the british royal family tbf


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Sep 15, 2022)

killer b said:


> Fairly sure a Netflix drama is probably not the most reliable source of data on the british royal family tbf


Probably more accurate than the BBC or British press tbh


----------



## moochedit (Sep 15, 2022)

Wilf said:


> Ah, cheers. I knew about the change, just hadn't twigged it was new births only.


I guess if they applied the change to everyone then some king a couple of centurys back is invalidated and the line has to recalculate making the duke of something or other king


----------



## spellbinder (Sep 15, 2022)

spring-peeper said:


> She got the corgis.


They're licking her toes right now 🦶🐶


----------



## bcuster (Sep 16, 2022)

Where is Fergie? Duchess of York's absence from royal mourning of Queen Elizabeth II explained
					

Sarah Ferguson, also known as Fergie, has been notably absent from the events leading up to Queen Elizabeth II's funeral. Royal experts explain the move to Fox News Digital.




					www.yahoo.com
				




_I had wondered about her_


----------



## albionism (Sep 16, 2022)

.


----------



## moochedit (Sep 16, 2022)

spellbinder said:


> They're licking her toes right now 🦶🐶


Oh yeah i'd forgotten about that


----------



## brogdale (Sep 17, 2022)

Had his Admiral of the Nonce costume on.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 17, 2022)

brogdale said:


> Had his Admiral of the Nonce costume on.
> 
> View attachment 343128





Nice. My grandfather served in the Royal Navy for 11 years, was sunk twice in WW2 and risked his life to save this country. And that rapey nonce gets to dress up and pretend that he represents my fucking grandpa? Cunt.


----------



## Aladdin (Sep 17, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Nice. My grandfather served in the Royal Navy for 11 years, was sunk twice in WW2 and risked his life to save this country. And that rapey nonce gets to dress up and pretend that he represents my fucking grandpa? Cunt.



Used there not be something about "bringing disgrace to a uniform"? 

The royals have no real dignity...if they think its ok to allow that scumbag wear that uniform.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 17, 2022)

brogdale said:


> Had his Admiral of the Nonce costume on.
> 
> View attachment 343128


Well may he hang his head in shame


----------



## mojo pixy (Sep 17, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Nice. My grandfather served in the Royal Navy for 11 years, was sunk twice in WW2 and risked his life to save this country. And that rapey nonce gets to dress up and pretend that he represents my fucking grandpa? Cunt.


FWIW he's widely despised in the navy for being an arrogant thick cunt.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 17, 2022)

Prince Andrew is now the Earl of Inverness. Does that make him the Loch Ness Noncer?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 17, 2022)

^^^ I am stealing that. It belongs to me now.


----------



## T & P (Sep 17, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> Prince Andrew is now the Earl of Inverness. Does that make him the Loch Ness Noncer?


----------



## Part 2 (Sep 17, 2022)

I saw that tweet and gave thought to claiming it as my own too.


----------



## Chilli.s (Sep 18, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> Prince Andrew is now the Earl of Inverness. Does that make him the Loch Ness Noncer?


Top work


----------



## Dom Traynor (Sep 18, 2022)

Chilli.s said:


> Top work


----------



## DaveCinzano (Sep 18, 2022)

Dom Traynor said:


> View attachment 343351




Accordingly, by the powers vested in me as Returning Officer, I declare Pickman's model the first of these two candidates to publicly submit this pun.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Sep 18, 2022)

Aladdin said:


> Used there not be something about "bringing disgrace to a uniform"?
> 
> The royals have no real dignity...if they think its ok to allow that scumbag wear that uniform.


Well it is the case that all sorts of heinous things are perpetrated in uniforms so I don't think it really matters tbh. Maybe its even quite fitting.


----------



## Raheem (Sep 18, 2022)

AmateurAgitator said:


> Maybe its even quite fitting.


From the photos, it looks a bit snug.


----------



## deeyo (Sep 18, 2022)

Aladdin said:


> Used there not be something about "bringing disgrace to a uniform"?
> 
> The royals have no real dignity...if they think its ok to allow that scumbag wear that uniform.


in a sane world, the real disgrace would be wearing a costume that shows that you've made a career out of the organised killing of other people.


----------



## teuchter (Sep 18, 2022)

DaveCinzano said:


> View attachment 343354View attachment 343355
> 
> Accordingly, by the powers vested in me as Returning Officer, I declare Pickman's model the first of these two candidates to publicly submit this pun.


How much did Pickman's model pay you to doctor the screenshot timestamp in an attempt to salvage his integrity?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Sep 18, 2022)

teuchter said:


> How much did Pickman's model pay you to doctor the screenshot timestamp in an attempt to salvage his integrity?
> 
> View attachment 343392


You can prove anything with facts 🤷


----------



## teuchter (Sep 18, 2022)

DaveCinzano said:


> You can prove anything with facts 🤷


Actually sorry - it's not you but Dom Traynor who is guilty of facilitating the deceipt. Not that we can rule out both of you being Pickman sock puppets.


----------



## gosub (Sep 30, 2022)

Prince Andrew's Scandal Is About To Take Over Headlines Yet Again - The List
					

Poor King Charles II. Just when the headlines about Prince Andrew were dying down, Prince Andrew's scandal is about to take over headlines yet again.




					www.thelist.com
				





A couple of things wrong with this Charles II has had his moment, and, I think, there will be more than enough bad news to bury this


----------



## chandlerp (Sep 30, 2022)

errm, It's King Charles III


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Sep 30, 2022)

i thought king charles ii's moment was over 300 years ago...


----------



## cesare (Sep 30, 2022)

chandlerp said:


> errm, It's King Charles III


Also Anne had a boy and a girl, not two boys.


----------



## Dystopiary (Sep 30, 2022)

That whole article is bad. Like the main problem with Andrew Windsor is that he had lots of sex? Ffs. The "Randy Andy" stuff (yuck) didn't really harm the royals' rep.
Also the person they describe as "a royal fan" is very definitely not, and it would've taken them seconds to find that out. (Search [twitter handle] + "queen.") 
And yeah, mistakes as above.


----------



## T & P (Oct 16, 2022)

Comforting news for Andrew today: he still has at least one loyal friend not afraid to publicly support him   






						Ghislaine Maxwell says she feels bad for ‘dear friend’ Prince Andrew | Ghislaine Maxwell | The Guardian
					

Comments will be embarrassing for royal who has tried to distance himself from disgraced socialite




					amp.theguardian.com


----------



## RedRedRose (Nov 23, 2022)

Man accused of heckling Prince Andrew at Queen’s funeral procession won’t face court



> “After careful consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, including the available admissible evidence, the procurator fiscal decided that there should be no proceedings taken at this time.
> 
> “The Crown reserves the right to proceed in the future if it is appropriate and in the public interest to do so.”


Alternatively, they wanted to avoid the embarrassment of further publicity.


----------



## surreybrowncap (Dec 21, 2022)

https://www.channel4.com/programmes/prince-andrew-the-musical
		


Corrected to Thursday 29th December....


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 21, 2022)

surreybrowncap said:


> https://www.channel4.com/programmes/prince-andrew-the-musical


Enfield will be playing the sweatless nonce of course.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 21, 2022)

Puddy_Tat said:


> i thought king charles ii's moment was over 300 years ago...



Cue 'King Charles I's time is up' thread.


----------



## surreybrowncap (Dec 21, 2022)

DotCommunist said:


> Enfield will be playing the sweatless nonce of course.


Actually Enfield will be playing Tony Blair.....


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Dec 21, 2022)

surreybrowncap said:


> https://www.channel4.com/programmes/prince-andrew-the-musical
> 
> 
> 
> Tomorrow at 9pm....



When satire becomes reality


----------



## danski (Dec 21, 2022)

surreybrowncap said:


> https://www.channel4.com/programmes/prince-andrew-the-musical
> 
> 
> 
> Tomorrow at 9pm....


Got all excited. Thursday 29th.


----------



## surreybrowncap (Dec 21, 2022)

danski said:


> Got all excited. Thursday 29th.


oops!!


----------



## spellbinder (Dec 21, 2022)

It'll be like a car crash you know you shouldn't watch but you just can't turn away.
Is this the state of todays telly ffs


----------



## Duncan2 (Dec 21, 2022)

Massively inappropriate don't know what they are thinking of.


----------



## friedaweed (Dec 21, 2022)

surreybrowncap said:


> Actually Enfield will be playing Tony Blair.....


Ahh the Feckless ponce then instead.


----------



## T & P (Dec 24, 2022)

Ah, diddums. Should we organise a whip-around for the poor fellow?









						Prince Andrew ‘kicked out’ of Buckingham Palace by King Charles
					

The Duke of York, 62, will reportedly no longer be permitted to hold an office inside the building or use it as an address for correspondence




					www.standard.co.uk


----------



## kenny g (Dec 27, 2022)

Yo, what's good, peeps?
I just wanted to talk a little bit about the prince Andrew, cause he's  been in the news a lot lately and I know a lot of people have strong feelings about him.
First of all, let me just say that I ain't no fan of the monarchy. I think it's an outdated institution that's more about preserving the privileges of a few than serving the needs of the many. But at the same time, I gotta give props to the royals for all the charitable work they do. I mean, they've got a lot of resources at their disposal and they use them to do some good in the world.
But let's not get it twisted, the royal family is still about maintaining their status and power, and they'll do whatever it takes to keep their throne. And I think that's something we should all be aware of, especially when we see them out there doing good deeds.
So, in short, I think the royal family is a mixed bag. On the one hand, they do some good in the world, but on the other hand, they're also about preserving their own interests and keeping their grip on power. It's up to us to decide how we feel about them and what we want to do about it.
Peace out.


----------



## Schmetterling (Dec 27, 2022)

T & P said:


> Ah, diddums. Should we organise a whip-around for the poor fellow?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


There was a very heavily hinting gossip article in the Daily Heil a couple of days ago about an Earl who, having attended someone’s house party, spat into a staff member’s face; the article‘s last line was ‘Time, self-evidently, that the family spat the Earl out for good.’. There were a lot of reports and pictures of various royal family members on the same page; the tabloids’ favourite means of naming someone without naming them.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 27, 2022)

Schmetterling said:


> There was a very heavily hinting gossip article in the Daily Heil a couple of days ago about an Earl who, having attended someone’s house party, spat into a staff member’s face; the article‘s last line was ‘Time, self-evidently, that the family spat the Earl out for good.’. There were a lot of reports and pictures of various royal family members on the same page; the tabloids’ favourite means of naming someone without naming them.




Who was the earl then?


----------



## Petcha (Dec 27, 2022)

He just keeps giving..









						Prince Andrew tells 'freezing' royal fan in Sandringham crowd
					

The royal asked a woman if she had cold feet. When she said 'freezing' he replied: 'Did you know the trick is to bring a newspaper? Stand on a newspaper and you insulate your feet.'




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## MrCurry (Dec 27, 2022)

Petcha said:


> He just keeps giving..
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Could you lay off the DM links? Or at least post a warning with it. Clicked it by accident without realising it was that shit rag.


----------



## Petcha (Dec 27, 2022)

MrCurry said:


> Could you lay off the DM links? Or at least post a warning with it. Clicked it by accident without realising it was that shit rag.



I really don't think your clicking on it is gonna massively increase the Mail's revenues

And it does have their URL and has their logo on the link (twice)


----------



## Schmetterling (Dec 27, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Who was the earl then?


Not sure whether it would be ok to say who I think it is/is being hinted at; I don’t want to get this site into trouble.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 27, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Who was the earl then?


As far as I know, based on very little knowledge in the subject, only one senior Royal is an Earl: the Earl of Wessex. The others are Dukes.


----------



## prunus (Dec 27, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> As far as I know, based on very little knowledge in the subject, only one senior Royal is an Earl: the Earl of Wessex. The others are Dukes.



According to this there are 190 of the useless blighters, which lengthens the odds a bit List of earls in the peerages of Britain and Ireland - Wikipedia


----------



## brogdale (Dec 27, 2022)




----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 27, 2022)

prunus said:


> According to this there are 190 of the useless blighters, which lengthens the odds a bit List of earls in the peerages of Britain and Ireland - Wikipedia


The hint was that it’s a child of the late Queen.


----------



## High Voltage (Dec 27, 2022)

Don't forget the Earl of Inverness


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 27, 2022)

High Voltage said:


> Don't forget the Earl of Inverness


He’s also a Duke, innit? Doesn’t that trump Earl?


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Dec 27, 2022)

Well it can't be Edward can it? He's "the nice one".


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 27, 2022)

Mrs Miggins said:


> Well it can't be Edward can it? He's "the nice one".


It’s all relative in a continuum of noxiousness.


----------



## prunus (Dec 27, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> The hint was that it’s a child of the late Queen.


 Ooh I didn't see where that snippet was , certainly narrows the field! Who said that?


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 27, 2022)

prunus said:


> Ooh I didn't see where that snippet was , certainly narrows the field! Who said that?





Schmetterling said:


> There was a very heavily hinting gossip article in the Daily Heil a couple of days ago about an Earl who, having attended someone’s house party, spat into a staff member’s face; the article‘s last line was ‘Time, self-evidently, that the family spat the Earl out for good.’. There were a lot of reports and pictures of various royal family members on the same page; the tabloids’ favourite means of naming someone without naming them.


I didn’t see it as it was in the DM. However the suggestion by Schmetterling is that the Mail were hinting at a senior Royal Earl, rather than a common-or-garden Earl.


----------



## prunus (Dec 27, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> I didn’t see it as it was in the DM. However the suggestion by Schmetterling is that the Mail were hinting at a senior Royal Earl, rather than a common-or-garden Earl.



Well a plague on all their houses I reckon


----------



## Schmetterling (Dec 27, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> I didn’t see it as it was in the DM. However the suggestion by Schmetterling is that the Mail were hinting at a senior Royal Earl, rather than a common-or-garden Earl.


That is how I read/interpreted the DM‘s insinuation. There is one particular Earl (one can be a Count and an Earl) who is known for being exceptionally boorish, ill-mannered, and entitled. Other guests at the party are said to have been utterly shocked, hoping the offender would be reported to the police for assault, which the victim did not want to do as she is employed by the host. 
All very salacious, I know; still … good gossip, no? 😂


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Dec 27, 2022)

Schmetterling said:


> (one can be a Count and an Earl)



or a cunt and an earl, by the sound of it


----------



## maomao (Dec 27, 2022)

Puddy_Tat said:


> or a cunt and an earl, by the sound of it


Pretty sure that's a precondition of being an Earl.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 27, 2022)

Schmetterling said:


> That is how I read/interpreted the DM‘s insinuation. There is one particular Earl (one can be a Count and an Earl) who is known for being exceptionally boorish, ill-mannered, and entitled. Other guests at the party are said to have been utterly shocked, hoping the offender would be reported to the police for assault, which the victim did not want to do as she is employed by the host.
> All very salacious, I know; still … good gossip, no? 😂


An entitled Earl?  say it isn't so


----------



## story (Dec 27, 2022)

A bloke who used to do security at the palace talks about Andrew.

no surprises here


----------



## Wilf (Dec 27, 2022)

If it's an earl and a member of the royal family itself, my extensive research (wikipedia) says that it must be 'the other one' aka Eddie.


----------



## maomao (Dec 27, 2022)

Wilf said:


> If it's an earl and a member of the royal family itself, my extensive research (wikipedia) says that it must be 'the other one' aka Eddie.


Prince Andrew is the Earl of Inverness (and Baron Killyleagh). I think they like to have a title from each of the component kingdoms. Because they're cunts.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 27, 2022)

maomao said:


> Prince Andrew is the Earl of Inverness (and Baron Killyleagh). I think they like to have a title from each of the component kingdoms. Because they're cunts.


My guess is that the even the mail would have named him if it had been the nonce.  Maybe Eddie needs to put a statement out saying it can't have been him because his military training left his spit glands not working?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 27, 2022)

maomao said:


> Prince Andrew is the Earl of Inverness (and Baron Killyleagh). I think they like to have a title from each of the component kingdoms. Because they're cunts.


England is a kingdom. Scotland is a kingdom. Wales is a principality. And Northern Ireland is a province


----------



## maomao (Dec 27, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> England is a kingdom. Scotland is a kingdom. Wales is a principality. And Northern Ireland is a province


Well Ireland was a kingdom before 1801 and he doesn't have one from Wales. But little brother Edward only has England and Scotland (Wessex and Forfar)


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 27, 2022)

maomao said:


> Prince Andrew is the Earl of Inverness (and Baron Killyleagh). I think they like to have a title from each of the component kingdoms. Because they're cunts.


Indeed, but it’s not normal to refer to them primarily by one of their “lesser” titles. The media will normally refer to the Duke of York by his Dukedom rather than his Earldom, excepting in specific circumstances.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 27, 2022)

maomao said:


> Well Ireland was a kingdom before 1801 and he doesn't have one from Wales. But little brother Edward only has England and Scotland (Wessex and Forfar)


A lot has happened to Ireland between the act of union and today.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 27, 2022)

story said:


> A bloke who used to do security at the palace talks about Andrew.
> 
> no surprises here



Does it say “he’s an entitled prick, a general sex pest and a noncy cunt”?


----------



## story (Dec 27, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> Does it say “he’s an entitled prick, a general sex pest and a noncy cunt”?



Yeah, pretty much exactly that.


----------



## Dom Traynor (Dec 27, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> Does it say “he’s an entitled prick, a general sex pest and a noncy cunt”?


The copper or Andrew?


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 27, 2022)

Dom Traynor said:


> The copper or Andrew?


I mean, neither would astonish me.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 27, 2022)

story said:


> Yeah, pretty much exactly that.


'I want you to replace all 72 teddy bears in exactly the position show in this diagram'.
- No son, I won't and as soon as you turn 6 you can start making your own bed, you little shite.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Dec 27, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> England is a kingdom. Scotland is a kingdom. Wales is a principality. And Northern Ireland is a province



england is a kingdom and has a king

wales is a principality and has a prince

the uk is a country and has rishi sunak...


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 27, 2022)

Puddy_Tat said:


> england is a kingdom and has a king
> 
> wales is a principality and has a prince
> 
> the uk is a country and has rishi sunak...


That's my December post of the month sorted


----------



## brogdale (Dec 27, 2022)

Puddy_Tat said:


> england is a kingdom and has a king
> 
> wales is a principality and has a prince
> 
> the uk is a country and has rishi sunak...


Is the UK a country, though?

Can we call the multi-part sovereign state of the UK an actual country?

England, Wales and Scotland are undeniably countries, but isn't the UK a state?


----------



## Cid (Dec 27, 2022)

story said:


> A bloke who used to do security at the palace talks about Andrew.
> 
> no surprises here




A swift google of this dude reveals he was done for defrauding 'colleagues, friends and others out of life savings, redundancy cash, pension payouts, retirement money and loans' to the tune of £3m. And '"The ability to inspire confidence and to sound plausible even when telling the most outlandish lies was very much Mr Page's stock in trade," said Douglas Day QC, prosecuting.'

So, y'know, when someone like that does a presumably paid interview, pinch of salt.









						Former royal protection officer guilty of £3m scam
					

Paul Page defrauded colleagues and friends to fund expensive lifestyle and keep afloat spread-betting scheme run from palace




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## story (Dec 27, 2022)

Cid said:


> A swift google of this dude reveals he was done for defrauding 'colleagues, friends and others out of life savings, redundancy cash, pension payouts, retirement money and loans' to the tune of £3m. And '"The ability to inspire confidence and to sound plausible even when telling the most outlandish lies was very much Mr Page's stock in trade," said Douglas Day QC, prosecuting.'
> 
> So, y'know, when someone like that does a presumably paid interview, pinch of salt.
> 
> ...



Tbh I assumed he was a wrong’un simply because he was doing a public interview about stuff he’d presumably previously signed and sworn to keep private.

I found the interview diverting and didn’t bother checking the source. I’m glad someone did though.


----------



## maomao (Dec 27, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> Indeed, but it’s not normal to refer to them primarily by one of their “lesser” titles. The media will normally refer to the Duke of York by his Dukedom rather than his Earldom, excepting in specific circumstances.


The exception being the Duke of Earl.


----------



## nosos (Dec 27, 2022)

Cid said:


> A swift google of this dude reveals he was done for defrauding 'colleagues, friends and others out of life savings, redundancy cash, pension payouts, retirement money and loans' to the tune of £3m. And '"The ability to inspire confidence and to sound plausible even when telling the most outlandish lies was very much Mr Page's stock in trade," said Douglas Day QC, prosecuting.'
> 
> So, y'know, when someone like that does a presumably paid interview, pinch of salt.
> 
> ...


It does all sound grimly plausible though, as much as I take your point. It's interesting to look through the YouTube comments with what you've shared here in mind.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 27, 2022)

brogdale said:


> but isn't the UK a state?




A fucking right old state.


----------



## Cid (Dec 27, 2022)

nosos said:


> It does all sound grimly plausible though, as much as I take your point. It's interesting to look through the YouTube comments with what you've shared here in mind.



Well yeah it does, plus libel laws etc.


----------



## nosos (Dec 27, 2022)

Cid said:


> Well yeah it does, plus libel laws etc.


The 70 Teddybears thing has the whiff of fabrication. It's too perfect for Youtube.


----------



## Sue (Dec 28, 2022)

Cid said:


> A swift google of this dude reveals he was done for defrauding 'colleagues, friends and others out of life savings, redundancy cash, pension payouts, retirement money and loans' to the tune of £3m. And '"The ability to inspire confidence and to sound plausible even when telling the most outlandish lies was very much Mr Page's stock in trade," said Douglas Day QC, prosecuting.'
> 
> So, y'know, when someone like that does a presumably paid interview, pinch of salt.
> 
> ...


Sounds like an all-round stand-up bloke.


----------



## Athos (Dec 28, 2022)

Prince Andrew is also the Earl of Inverness AKA the Loch Ness Noncer.


----------



## 1927 (Dec 28, 2022)

Athos said:


> Prince Andrew is also the Earl of Inverness AKA the Loch Ness Noncer.


#8,461!


----------



## Athos (Dec 28, 2022)

1927 said:


> #8,461!


 fucking time travellers stealing my joke!


----------



## teuchter (Dec 28, 2022)

It's the joke Pickman's model pretended he had come up with himself, then got found out. Embarrassing, especially for someone trying to give the impression they're a better person than Prince Andrew.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 28, 2022)

teuchter said:


> It's the joke Pickman's model pretended he had come up with himself, then got found out. Embarrassing, especially for someone trying to give the impression they're a better person than Prince Andrew.


There are very few individuals on earth who have "to give the impression that they're a better person than" Andrew Windsor.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 28, 2022)

teuchter said:


> It's the joke Pickman's model pretended he had come up with himself, then got found out. Embarrassing, especially for someone trying to give the impression they're a better person than Prince Andrew.


You've something of an unhealthy obsession with me.


----------



## tim (Dec 28, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> England is a kingdom. Scotland is a kingdom. Wales is a principality. And Northern Ireland is a province


The North of Ireland is two thirds of a province, so more of an entity in reality.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 28, 2022)

tim said:


> The North of Ireland is two thirds of a province, so more of an entity in reality.


A province of the United Kingdom, not - as you say - a province of ireland


----------



## Aladdin (Dec 28, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> A province of the United Kingdom, not - as you say - a province of ireland



Ulster is a province in Ireland. 
6 of the 9 counties are sadly still part of the UK.

But Ulster is still considered Irish...even in terms of sports. It's a wee anomaly.


----------



## friedaweed (Dec 28, 2022)

kenny g said:


> Yo, what's good, peeps?
> I just wanted to talk a little bit about the prince Andrew, cause he's  been in the news a lot lately and I know a lot of people have strong feelings about him.
> First of all, let me just say that I ain't no fan of the monarchy. I think it's an outdated institution that's more about preserving the privileges of a few than serving the needs of the many. But at the same time, I gotta give props to the royals for all the charitable work they do. I mean, they've got a lot of resources at their disposal and they use them to do some good in the world.
> But let's not get it twisted, the royal family is still about maintaining their status and power, and they'll do whatever it takes to keep their throne. And I think that's something we should all be aware of, especially when we see them out there doing good deeds.
> ...


Here's Tom with the weather...


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 28, 2022)

story said:


> Tbh I assumed he was a wrong’un simply because he was doing a public interview about stuff he’d presumably previously signed and sworn to keep private.
> 
> I found the interview diverting and didn’t bother checking the source. I’m glad someone did though.



I don't have a problem with people going against NDA's etc in order to expose wrongdoing or criminality. I also don't think the royals have a right to privacy, because they claim that their existence is somehow a public service and anything done by public servants on the public tab should be subject to scrutiny.

None of that rules out this guy being a prick of course.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 28, 2022)

Aladdin said:


> Ulster is a province in Ireland.
> 6 of the 9 counties are sadly still part of the UK.
> 
> But Ulster is still considered Irish...even in terms of sports. It's a wee anomaly.


Yes, I know that like leinster,  connacht and munster ulster is a province of Ireland. I know three of ulster's provinces are in the 26 co state, with the others under british rule. But in UK terms Northern ireland is a province of the UK.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Dec 28, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> Indeed, but it’s not normal to refer to them primarily by one of their “lesser” titles. The media will normally refer to the Duke of York by his Dukedom rather than his Earldom, excepting in specific circumstances.


Duke is trumped by Prince.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 28, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Duke is trumped by Prince.


True.  I’m not sure how that works.  Maybe if you’re not in the direct succession your princeliness is lesser?

We really need a resident royal expert.


----------



## friedaweed (Dec 28, 2022)

So was it the one who sleeps in the box with Looby Loo then?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 28, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> True.  I’m not sure how that works.  Maybe if you’re not in the direct succession your princeliness is lesser?
> 
> We really need a resident royal expert.











						British prince - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org


----------



## friedaweed (Dec 28, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> We really need a resident royal exexpert.


Let's put an advert out for a new poster to fulfil that job.

Are there any royalty forums we could approach?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 28, 2022)

friedaweed said:


> Let's put an advert out for a new poster to fulfil that job.
> 
> Are there any royalty forums we could approach?


Yes, where the royal lickspittles are segregated for the protection of everyone else


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 28, 2022)

friedaweed said:


> So was it the one who sleeps in the box with Looby Loo then?


Don’t sully Andy Pandy for me!

One of our family legends is that I’d cry when they sang “Andy is waving goodbye. Goodbye”.   (I’ll do the jokes: I must have been 16 etc).


----------



## friedaweed (Dec 28, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> Yes, where the royal lickspittles are segregated for the protection of everyone else


Let's recruit one. It would be fun and informative. We could keep a book on flounce date


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 28, 2022)

friedaweed said:


> Let's recruit one. It would be fun and informative. We could keep a book on flounce date


Likely same as join date


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 28, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> British prince - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> ...


OK.  I’m still a bit vague on how something is judged a “senior peerage” over another, but that’s more than I knew a minute ago.


----------



## JimW (Dec 28, 2022)

Baron Greenback is a less odious member of the aristocracy than Andrew.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Dec 28, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> True.  I’m not sure how that works.  Maybe if you’re not in the direct succession your princeliness is lesser?
> 
> We really need a resident royal expert.


Looks like there’s only the title of Prince of Wales. Harry is a Prince of nowhere but a Duke of Sussex. I think you might be right about direct succession.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Dec 28, 2022)

JimW said:


> Baron Greenback is a less odious member of the aristocracy than Andrew.


Toadally 👍


----------



## kenny g (Dec 28, 2022)

friedaweed said:


> Here's Tom with the weather...


Have to come clean that I used the open AI chat bot to create that post. I think it took "in the style of urban75" to mean something else.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 28, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Harry is a Prince of nowhere



But now he's moved to (near) Bel Air...


----------



## maomao (Dec 28, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> You've something of an unhealthy obsession with me.


You've posted his name (including quotes) 1069 times whereas he has posted yours (or abbreviated to Pickmans) a mere 727. The eviden e suggests that you are obsessed rather more then he.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 28, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> But now he's moved to (near) Bel Air...


The Bank's mansion was available on air BnB a while back:
' The actual mansion isn’t actually located in Bel-Air, California, but instead is located in Brentwood, California, according to Realtor.com'


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Dec 28, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> True.  I’m not sure how that works.  Maybe if you’re not in the direct succession your princeliness is lesser?
> 
> We really need a resident royal expert.



there is an order of precedence (as in who outranks who, not who's the most obnoxious although there may be overlaps)

i can't even face reading it - the 'they're all a bunch of cunts' approach seems easier


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 28, 2022)

Puddy_Tat said:


> there is an order of precedence (as in who outranks who, not who's the most obnoxious although there may be overlaps)
> 
> i can't even face reading it - the 'they're all a bunch of cunts' approach seems easier


Aye, but the question is why does this sort of thing appear:

“The Sovereign's brothers​
The Duke of York​
The Earl of Wessex”​
Why are they not listed as Prince Andrew and Prince Edward? How do they work out when a Dukedom is more noteworthy than a princeship and so on?


----------



## teuchter (Dec 28, 2022)

maomao said:


> You've posted his name (including quotes) 1069 times whereas he has posted yours (or abbreviated to Pickmans) a mere 727. The eviden e suggests that you are obsessed rather more then he.


My rough estimate is that about 700 of those 727 are direct responses to being name-checked by Pickman's model , making him aproximately 4000% as obsessive as me, another damning statistic to add to his hall of shame.


----------



## JimW (Dec 28, 2022)

Apparently Edward is due to be made the new Duke of Edinburgh. Perhaps they're waiting until he's brushed up on his racist quips.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 28, 2022)

Doesn't seem right that these people can just call themselves after places without the residents of said places having any say in this; at the very least the RF should be compelled to fund a local plebiscite to determine whether or not there is democratic consent.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Dec 28, 2022)

JimW said:


> Apparently Edward is due to be made the new Duke of Edinburgh. Perhaps they're waiting until he's brushed up on his racist quips.



has edinburgh had to make do with an agency duke or something since phil fell off his perch?


----------



## JimW (Dec 28, 2022)

Puddy_Tat said:


> has edinburgh had to make do with an agency duke or something since phil fell off his perch?


Erected a couple of temporary marquesses


----------



## cupid_stunt (Dec 28, 2022)

brogdale said:


> Doesn't seem right that these people can just call themselves after places without the residents of said places having any say in this; at the very least the RF should be compelled to fund a local plebiscite to determine whether or not there is democratic consent.



I didn't have any say in the Duke and Duchess of Sussex getting those titles, but I hope they keep them, as it gets Mail readers and GB News viewers frothing at the mouth.


----------



## story (Dec 28, 2022)

SpookyFrank said:


> I don't have a problem with people going against NDA's etc in order to expose wrongdoing or criminality. I also don't think the royals have a right to privacy, because they claim that their existence is somehow a public service and anything done by public servants on the public tab should be subject to scrutiny.
> 
> None of that rules out this guy being a prick of course.




I don’t disagree with this. But if he was a whistleblower acting with some kind of honour or integrity that could /should have been covered. A short question and brief answer to acknowledge the situation would have been sufficient. Would have given weight to the whole thing.

Also, it’s hardly groundbreaking stuff.

Never mind anyway. It’s not an important interview. As I said, it’s diverting at best.



I wish I’d never opened this Pandora’s box now.  So many posts generated by something so unnecessary.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 28, 2022)

JimW said:


> Erected a couple of temporary marquesses


That hothead, Sonny, is already talking about going to the marquesses!


----------



## story (Dec 28, 2022)

nosos said:


> The 70 Teddybears thing has the whiff of fabrication. It's too perfect for Youtube.




That story is widely known. Loads of google hits for it. No way to be sure it’s totally accurate, I guess.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 28, 2022)

story said:


> That story is widely known. Loads of google hits for it.


To be fair many things “widely known on the internet” are untrue.  I’m willing to believe this one though. They’re probably crusty, too. I’m saying they’ve got dry sperm on them. From him humping them.


----------



## nosos (Dec 28, 2022)

Totally down a very strange post-Christmas rabbit hole now 🧸


----------



## story (Dec 28, 2022)

nosos said:


> Totally down a very strange post-Christmas rabbit hole now 🧸




So my efforts were not entirely wasted.


Watch out for the Balanciaga swamps down there tho...


----------



## DaveCinzano (Dec 28, 2022)

nosos said:


> Totally down a very strange post-Christmas rabbit teddyhole now 🧸


FTFY 👍🎄


----------



## story (Dec 28, 2022)




----------



## Wilf (Dec 28, 2022)

friedaweed said:


> Let's put an advert out for a new poster to fulfil that job.
> 
> Are there any royalty forums we could approach?


Well, if Editor does decide to sell up, we could sound Debrett's out as a possible buyer.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 28, 2022)

Wilf said:


> Well, if Editor does decide to sell up, we could sound Debrett's out as a possible buyer.


Less Who's Who, more Who's a massive cunt?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Dec 28, 2022)

brogdale said:


> Less Who's Who, more Who's a massive cunt?


_Who's Not_, more like, amirite?!


----------



## friedaweed (Dec 28, 2022)

JimW said:


> Apparently Edward is due to be made the new Duke of Edinburgh. Perhaps they're waiting until he's brushed up on his racist quips.


Part of the initiation rights.


Spit on a member of all 54 native states of the commonwealth 
Insult 5 nations states not in the commonwealth 
Drive a landrover for 1km  in a straight line after imbibing 4 bottles of 30 yr old Macallan bouble cask
Assemble the staff and do it in reverse. 
Go down in the crypt and make an offering.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 28, 2022)

maomao said:


> You've posted his name (including quotes) 1069 times whereas he has posted yours (or abbreviated to Pickmans) a mere 727. The evidence suggests that you are obsessed rather more then he.


You say that like there's only one measure of obsession, simple numbers. There isn't. I've mentioned teuchter in fewer than 0.5% of my posts, according to your figures, in comparison to which teuchter has mentioned me in almost 2% of his contributions: he is clearly more concerned with me than I him.

E2a: as you'll see on this thread I posted a joke three months back. Teuchter came along and traced it back to a tweet I'd not seen then made reference to this again this morning, three months after the event. Doesn't really speak to this so-called obsession you suggest I have.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Dec 28, 2022)

*Qualitative Vs Quantitative Obsession: An Empirical Study*

_In this thesis I will first._..


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 28, 2022)

DaveCinzano said:


> *Qualitative Vs Quantitative Obsession: An Empirical Study*
> 
> _In this thesis I will first._..


I don't suppose you saw my edit in 8577 before posting.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Dec 28, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> I don't suppose you saw my edit in 8577 before posting.


I'm just here for the Likes, I barely read further than the first sentence of anything 🤣


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 28, 2022)

DaveCinzano said:


> I'm just here for the Likes, I barely read further than the first sentence of anything 🤣


No wonder you fit in so well here


----------



## moochedit (Dec 29, 2022)

brogdale said:


> Doesn't seem right that these people can just call themselves after places without the residents of said places having any say in this; at the very least the RF should be compelled to fund a local plebiscite to determine whether or not there is democratic consent.


Yeah lets start with "king of the united kingdom of great britain and northern ireland"


----------



## teuchter (Dec 29, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> You say that like there's only one measure of obsession, simple numbers. There isn't. I've mentioned teuchter in fewer than 0.5% of my posts, according to your figures, in comparison to which teuchter has mentioned me in almost 2% of his contributions: he is clearly more concerned with me than I him.


Seeing as your post count is 5 times higher than mine, we'd expect that in the day to day business of the boards, an averaged standardised poster might mention you five times as often as they would mention me. Unless of course for some reason I was considerably more worthy of mention. When we look at the figures kindly presented for analysis by maomao we see that in spite of my modest level of contribution, you afford me considerably more attention than I do you. Really I should be mentioning you, one of the towering figures in the postcount league, five times as often as you do me and yet in reality it is 25% less.

I leave it to the Prince Andrew Thread reader to decide whether this demonstrates an unreasonable obsession on your part, or is simply a measure of whose contributions and responses are more sought after.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 29, 2022)

teuchter said:


> Seeing as your post count is 5 times higher than mine, we'd expect that in the day to day business of the boards, an averaged standardised poster might mention you five times as often as they would mention me. Unless of course for some reason I was considerably more worthy of mention. When we look at the figures kindly presented for analysis by maomao we see that in spite of my modest level of contribution, you afford me considerably more attention than I do you. Really I should be mentioning you, one of the towering figures in the postcount league, five times as often as you do me and yet in reality it is 25% less.
> 
> I leave it to the Prince Andrew Thread reader to decide whether this demonstrates an unreasonable obsession on your part, or is simply a measure of whose contributions and responses are more sought after.


Your windbaggery knows no end. I do tho, and I'm out. You can fart and prate to your heart's content about me, I'm chucking you on ignore.


----------



## andysays (Dec 29, 2022)

There's more than one way to measure obsession, but when you get to the stage of arguing across multiple threads about which of you is the most obsessed, I'd say you've both gone way beyond the point where it's healthy.

It's also increasingly tedious for those of us who couldn't give a toss about your ongoing obsession with each other, not that I expect either of you to care about that.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 29, 2022)

andysays said:


> There's more than one way to measure obsession, but when you get to the stage of arguing across multiple threads about which of you is the most obsessed, I'd say you've both gone way beyond the point where it's healthy.
> 
> It's also increasingly tedious for those of us who couldn't give a toss about your ongoing obsession with each other, not that I expect either of you to care about that.


This hasn't been argued, by me at least, over more than this thread. If you look at this thread solely you'd see that teuchter's posts are aimed at me - saying Prince Philip was my beloved idol, for example. Saying I got a joke from a tweet I never saw. Saying other people are my sock puppets. Raking shit up three months after the incident.

It's in that context I mentioned obsession. I reckon a lot of shit on urban gets seen as equivalent because its easier that way than to explore what's actually happening, to say it's just pickmans again drawing shit out. But it's not - and it's really pissing me off, which I'm sure teuchter regards as a win.

Anyway, that's my last word on the subject


----------



## Dom Traynor (Dec 30, 2022)

brogdale said:


> Doesn't seem right that these people can just call themselves after places without the residents of said places having any say in this; at the very least the RF should be compelled to fund a local plebiscite to determine whether or not there is democratic consent.


That's not how aristocracy works old bean.


----------



## ouirdeaux (Dec 30, 2022)

maomao said:


> You've posted his name (including quotes) 1069 times whereas he has posted yours (or abbreviated to Pickmans) a mere 727. The eviden e suggests that you are obsessed rather more then he.



You've counted all that? You must be obsessed with both of them.


----------



## maomao (Dec 30, 2022)

ouirdeaux said:


> You've counted all that? You must be obsessed with both of them.


There's a search function.


----------



## ouirdeaux (Dec 30, 2022)

maomao said:


> There's a search function.



That you have to bother to use, and tally up the results of.


----------



## maomao (Dec 30, 2022)

ouirdeaux said:


> That you have to bother to use, and tally up the results of.


Tally up's a bit strong. All you need to know is how many pages of results and how many results on the last page. But yes, it was a whole minute or two's bother.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 30, 2022)

I wish people weren’t so obsessed about how obsessed other folk are with each other.


----------



## Athos (Dec 30, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> I wish people weren’t so obsessed about how obsessed other folk are with each other.


I don't know why you're obsessing about this.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Dec 30, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> I wish people weren’t so obsessed about how obsessed other folk are with each other.


I agree, Folder 287 in The Files is just brimming with such pointless bickering 🙄


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Dec 30, 2022)

No, you are.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 30, 2022)

Too important a thread to be diluted with beef; hasn't anyone got any new dirt on the scumbag?


----------



## tim (Dec 30, 2022)

brogdale said:


> Too important a thread to be diluted with beef; hasn't anyone got any new dirt on the scumbag?


He went to church last Sunday.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 30, 2022)

tim said:


> He went to church last Sunday.


Hopefully, that was the end of Solomon Noncey.

_Solomon Grundy,
Born on a Monday,
Christened on Tuesday,
Married on Wednesday,
Took ill on Thursday,
Grew worse on Friday,
Died on Saturday,
Buried on Sunday,
That was the end,
Of Solomon Grundy!_


----------



## brogdale (Dec 30, 2022)

Quality.


----------



## dessiato (Dec 30, 2022)

brogdale said:


> Too important a thread to be diluted with beef; hasn't anyone got any new dirt on the scumbag?


I watched the musical last night. They missed some parts of his life. They never mentioned the relationship with Koo Stark which was quite a scandal at the time.


----------



## Raheem (Dec 30, 2022)

brogdale said:


> Quality.



I don't get this.


----------



## High Voltage (Dec 30, 2022)

Raheem said:


> I don't get this.


Thank you . . . me neither (I don't feel so "unkool" now)


----------



## iona (Dec 30, 2022)

Raheem said:


> I don't get this.





High Voltage said:


> Thank you . . . me neither (I don't feel so "unkool" now)


It's referring to Andrew Tate (see recent posts in the Joe Rogan thread), he was trying to wind up Greta Thunberg on twitter but apparently a pizza box that was visible in something he posted ended up giving away his location or playing some part in him getting arrested or something.


----------



## Part 2 (Dec 30, 2022)

Raheem said:


> I don't get this.





High Voltage said:


> Thank you . . . me neither (I don't feel so "unkool" now)



It's about Andrew Tate. Apparently the authorities knew he was back in Romania because he posted a video with pizza boxes in it and said something about making sure not to recycle them.

eta: beaten to it by iona


----------



## Wilf (Dec 30, 2022)

Okay, I'm on board with that. Right, who is Andrew Tate?

EDIT: I've searched: _oh my_.


----------



## a_chap (Dec 30, 2022)

brogdale said:


> Quality.




Along the same lines...


----------



## brogdale (Dec 30, 2022)

Wilf said:


> Okay, I'm on board with that. Right, who is Andrew Tate?
> 
> EDIT: I've searched: _oh my_.


On the right, (as we look at it).


----------



## brogdale (Dec 30, 2022)

brogdale said:


> On the right, (as we look at it).
> 
> View attachment 357818


Falange hates traffickers...apparently.


----------



## T & P (Dec 30, 2022)

brogdale said:


> On the right, (as we look at it).
> 
> View attachment 357818


You know what? I’m starting to distrust this Nigel Farage fellow…


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 30, 2022)

T & P said:


> You know what? I’m starting to dislike this Nigel Farage fellow…




He was married to a European don’t cha know…


----------



## UrbaneFox (Dec 31, 2022)

brogdale said:


> Too important a thread to be diluted with beef; hasn't anyone got any new dirt on the scumbag?


He's still 'closely associated' with his ex wife, and she was invited for xmas lunch. I can't remember how I came by this piece of information, but I'm sure it's true.

It might have been in here, but probably not as it was recorded ages ago.


----------



## chandlerp (Dec 31, 2022)

Don't they live together in the same property anyway?


----------

