Prince Andrew no surprise

[Pixxie7]

No surprise that the met have stopped. Their investigation into PA.

I agree nothing will happen to PA but he will be shamed for the rest of his days

I wonder at what point he'll notice, though? I can imagine him whining to Charles about wanting his Admiral uniform when he's in his 70s.

Ahhh but shock horror he's only a Vice Admiral, an honour given to him after the Epstein debacle. He missed out on full Admiral, bet he's miffed about that.
I hope the palace has stocked up on mothballs for the dress up uniforms...

@SunscreenCentral

I have not read the full thread, but I shall.

The point I suppose I'd like to make is that PA does seem to have enjoyed special protection based purely on his "Royalty" since I think back to how Dominic Strauss-Kahn an equally unsavoury person in his private life, extremely wealthy and positioned to become the Premier of France got fucked out on the side of the road at last because of his alleged assault on a (poor, unconnected) hotel worker.
Remember that?!
One of the biggest scandals of French political life in recent modern history. He was ended. By the French (who of course notoriously look the other way as adults conduct themselves as they wish behind closed doors).
The Andrew scandal will end up being another festering boil on the arse of Britain and absolutely nothing will happen.
Off to read the full thread now

In the interests of accuracy, Strauss-Kahn's political career was already long over by the time the allegations were made. He left politics and resigned from his party after Sarkozy was elected president in 2007. Prior to his resignation he had been considered an early favourite for the Socialist nomination for the Presidency of France in 2012, but his resignation put an end to that. He was not positioned to become Premier or President of France at the time of the scandal, which was in 2011. He wasn't involved in politics at all.

One month after resigning from his party, he became Managing Director of the IMF. He resigned from this position in 2011 when he was arrested by the New York police following an allegation by a maid at the Sofitel New York Hotel. Charges were subsequently dropped when the prosecution decided the maid lacked credibility as she had repeatedly lied since making her original statement and the physical evidence was inconclusive.

Other allegations were made and a French journalist who claimed he had attempted to rape her said she would bring a civil case against him if there was no criminal prosecution. The prosecution was dropped due to lack of evidence. The journalist did not bring a civil case.

He did eventually stand trial on a charge of "aggravated pimping" but was acquitted in 2015.

Since leaving the IMF he has held a number of senior positions with various banks. I believe he is still on the board of the Russian Regional Development Bank and the Russian Direct Investment Fund.

He has not attempted to re-enter French politics but there is nothing to indicate he ever had any intention of doing so. I think the idea that he was "ended by the French" is a long way from the truth.

Yes all if that is on Wiki
It's worth watching the Netflix series on him.

An unpleasant man (understatement)

As I was saying upthread, the number of wealthy, entitled, powerful white men in positions of power with no moral compass is not nice to contemplate. It’s one reason I am intrigued by all this public lashing of Andrew - he’s a sleaze and an arrogant boor, yes, and possibly worse too, but trust me there are far, far worse out there that fly under the radar. I get that lots of people very much dislike the Royal Family and in Andrew they give their critics all the ammunition in the world, but there are better examples of corruption very close at hand, who just get away with it.

Anyway, it’s in the prosecution’s interest to agree to this request because there is no way they will want this trial to founder due to procedural issues or problems with the jury selection. If acceding to a mild request now will prevent a mistrial, they have absolutely no reason not to agree. They won’t learn anything substantive about the defence from jury selection

I agree, up to a point, but just because there's someone worse it doesn't negate his behaviour.

Sadly, that's life... there always is.
And if someone starts a thread on someone worse, I'll be all over it like a rash

It’s one reason I am intrigued by all this public lashing of Andrew - he’s a sleaze and an arrogant boor, yes, and possibly worse too, but trust me there are far, far worse out there that fly under the radar.

Maybe because behaviour like Andrew's is expected of tycoons and politicians so we can shrug it off. Most people have no emotional attachment to them.

For decades, the Saxe Coburg Gothas have carefully constructed a fairytale - because that's what it is, they have done absolutely nothing to deserve what they have, they've just played us all for fools if you look at the history. No talent, no charisma, no inherent brand value except what they construct based on their self-created myth, and business acumen only to the point of protecting their own interests. They have to "buy in" talent with Kate, for example.

They've built their legitimacy on being our heroes, otherwise the mask falls off, it all breaks apart and we will see them for what they are. As we are now doing. Even a diehard monarchist can't read Norman Baker's book (among others) and still look at the RF in the same way.

The rest of PA's family is also going to get a lashing, in my very humble opinion. The VG case is just Chapter 1.

I agree. And I surprise myself saying so, because I never used to feel like this.
I put it down to me maturing (it took a long time lol), asking questions more, looking into all sorts of things more, and it's been a drip drip of dodgy stuff that has opened my eyes. They really are going to have to be squeaky clean from now on, but I actually think that's impossible. One more milk advert, affair, manipulation of laws the rest of us have to abide to.... and their goose is cooked.

I know we all probably have odd or strange or difficult members of the family but really.... they seem to have more than most, with no real self awareness.

I've rarely seen it better put than in your last post, Church, and as you suggest the history is very relevant

Even the creation of the Windsor name was a fairytale, done like so much else to buttress the image and avoid unwelcome comment, as was the refusal of asylum for the Russian imperial family which led to the whole lot being murdered

I sometimes wonder how this entire family can live with themselves, and can only put it down to a complete lack of normal human emotions, along with the money and influence to avoid any kind of responsibility

My thoughts exactly, Puzzledandpissedoff. It is the apparent absence of conscience and shameless inability to read the room that is so jaw-dropping.

When you measure them against our own moral compass, it

grinds the gears!

Another despicable element of Andrew's behaviour I didn't know about...

How Prince Andrew helped a secretive bank woo dodgy clients.

Yes Roussette I posted another link about Banque Havilland on the other RF thread the other day.

Impossible to keep track of it all!! It's like he set out to get involved with as many shady people as possible!

Oh I missed that.

It's unbelievable isn't it... and the thing is... this is what we know about. It's like an iceberg, imagine what's below the surface. We only know a very small bit of what is leaked or reported on by persistant investigative journalism.

Yet people are happy to accept the RF as they are... with no questioning of them.

If you are concerned about Prince Andrew and his relationship as am ambassador for Banque Havilland to help them woo clients - that is honestly no different at all to the Sussexes most recent announced appointment as “Impact Officers” for the FinTech Ethic.

They have not been hired for their experience or expertise in funds management or financial services generally (because they have none - as Megan’s blurb about it made clear). They have been hired as ambassadors for the brand with, I am sure, a clear expectation that they and the founders will all be able to cash out by either their company being acquired by a big name financial institution, or by floating themselves on the stock market.

Fintechs startups work on a low payment/high equity stake remuneration basis, so the Sussexes won’t be being paid a high salary for their role. They will be taking an equity stake (the press release has blandly talked about them “investing” themselves) with a mutual expectation that the publicity they bring will bring attention and funds to the company, and lead to all the shareholders being able to make a great deal of money in due course.

All fund management companies exist to take a cut of someone else’s money. Anyone who is interested in the “Ethical” investment opportunities the business promotes can either find them themselves, or ask their existing advisors to look for them.

That's interesting... bringing the Andrew thread back round to yet again criticism of Harry & Meghan.

What a surprise
Not.

Serenster It's not the wooing of clients that's the issue. It's the type of clients being wooed e.g. the Aliyevs et al.

David Rowland the banker is another superstar also linked to JE.

H&M not mentioned.

emerging-europe.com/news/azerbaijan-ties-add-to-prince-andrews-woes/

that is honestly no different at all to the Sussexes most recent announced appointment as “Impact Officers” for the FinTech Ethic

Totally different.

FinTech Ethic... "The company is aimed at raising awareness around income inequality, climate change and racial injustice, particularly among young people, after he became increasingly “disgruntled at the fat cats getting fatter,”

Banque Havilland - "the picture of Banque Havilland that emerges from the documents and interviews is of a bank willing to work with people most other financial institutions would shun. There was Kolawole Aluko, an energy magnate who got a €25 million ($30 million) loan at a time when he was the subject of media reports about a bribery scandal in Nigeria’s oil industry. Joshua Kulei, the personal assistant to former Kenyan President Daniel Arap Moi, received a £2.2 million ($2.9 million) mortgage despite being banned from the U.S. because of graft allegations he’s denied. And a company controlled by the heirs of deceased Georgian businessman Arkady Patarkatsishvili borrowed more than $5 million from the Rowlands. The money was routed through one of their accounts at the bank, over objections from a senior compliance officer who described Patarkatsishvili, in emails to Jonathan Rowland and other bank executives in 2010, as an alleged criminal and his money as tainted.
Businessweek reported in November that Banque Havilland is facing a criminal investigation in Luxembourg for, among other things, its dealings with the family of another head of state, Azerbaijan’s President Ilham Aliyev"

Oh and they've been fined £4million for money laundering.

A little different to the tie up with FinTechEthic 🤣😂

There are pages and pages of dodgy dealings this Bank is involved in, if you look... and there we go.. the founder David Rowland is so friendly with PA that he is sat feet away from Eugenie at her wedding.

And... from 2 years ago

"Prince Andrew made a secret deal to fly around the world on a £40million luxury jet owned by a controversial financier whose private bank he quietly promoted while working as Britain’s overseas trade envoy.

A leaked email reveals how Andrew fixed it so that property tycoon David Rowland’s sumptuous 14-seat plane was used for some of his overseas Royal engagements after the Prince became ‘frustrated’ with the ageing aircraft provided by the RAF.

Records show how in the last two years Andrew has travelled on the Global Express at least five times while on official Royal duties, some of which he combined with promoting his treasured Pitch@Palace project or Mr Rowland’s latest business venture."

It's like he set out to get involved with as many shady people as possible!

You have to admit he's damned good at it - and this is what I meant about any "cutting down" by Charles making no difference at all, even assuming he doesn't just keep any savings for himself.
Lessen whatever Andrew currently gets and he'll just recah even deeper into the pockets of dubious folk

Oh no! It is just a coincidence that Andrew gets involved with lots of dodgy people surely? Isn't he our role model?

There is a lot (a lot!) I could write about that, but I’ll keep it brief. The people that Andrew was schmoozing to introduce them to the bank may or may not have passed its due diligence, know your client, and anti-money laundering checks. As an EU bank based in Luxembourg, it needs to apply EU rules to determine this, and it is the bank’s sole risk if it makes the wrong call on any of them.

What Meghan and Harry is doing is encouraging retail consumers (people like you and me) to use the services of the a “a tech-driven asset management platform that powers personalization for advisors” that will, for a fee (and not a one off fee either, a regular fee that’s a percentage of the money you invest), tell them where they should invest their money. They are clearly aiming at people without a great deal of sophistication, as Meghan’s message was “From the world I come from, you don't talk about investing, right? You don't have the luxury to invest. That sounds so fancy”.

So, they are trying to encourage people who think making an investment is “fancy” to use the services of a company that will tell them where to invest it. You’re not getting a bespoke service here by the way - it’s “tech-driven”. That means it’s an algorithm (lest you had any doubt of that, the company only has 29 employees - nowhere near adequate to personally advise investors). They will take a cut of your money at regular intervals o provide this service.

Investment management firms solely exist to take a cut of their customer’s money. It’s up to the customer to decide if they think paying them that amount of money is worth it. Time will tell if their algorithm turned out to give suitable and appropriate investments for their client (spoiler: often, they don’t - take a look at some of the investment managers fined for stuffing this up).

So what Meghan and Harry are doing is encouraging ordinary people to invest their money, which means taking a risk with it. And not because they are altruistic - but rather because they and the company stand to make a lot of money if they can fin a buyer for their business, or float it. You are right, it;’s not the same as Prince Andrew. Not at all.

@Serenster I don’t know the details of this new thing Harry and Meghan are involved in, or of the Banque Havilland thing mentioned, but Harry and Meghan aren’t working members of the royal family, as Andrew was. So their behaviour isn’t required to be up to the same level of scrutiny. Obviously we can have opinions of what they do, but it’s not our business in the same way that Andrew’s actions are.

What due diligence checks?!? Banque Havilland didn't do any!!! It deliberately set out to target kleptocrats and corrupt businessmen and used PA as a "door opener" to facilitate contacts with corrupt monarchies that Rowland wouldn't otherwise have had access to. It's apparently under investigation by the Luxembourg financial regulator.

Financial regulation has (supposedly) tightened up a lot since the early 2000s but I bet they had banking blacklists even back then.

Harry and Meghan are celebrities now. We do not fund them. So I judge them in the same way I judge other celebrities.
Andrew though is funded by us and so he is not just another celebrity. If we are giving him money, then he needs to be 100% ethical, he is not.