Prince Andrew stripped...

[Sarahlou63]

Of all royal patronages and military titles.

Guess mummy has finally had enough.

@MsTSwift

They are jumping the gun. He’s denied it to the hilt and no court has found him guilty.

Don’t get me wrong can’t stand the man but think this shows up the whole royal edifice for the sham that it is. People shouldn’t be born to roles or you end up with idiots like this.

But his stupid, reckless, entitled behaviour and dreadful judgement in:

a) Being friends with a sex offender - for years, asking for and taking monies from him, accepting flights, breaks at his private island, visiting him in New York and staying at his house where young women and 'masseuses' were streaming in and out.
b) Inviting people like Epstein, Maxwell and the others into his mother's state residences, to the 18th and 21st birthday parties of his children, to shooting weekends, parties organised for their birthdays at Sandringham.
c) Asking for and taking monies from wealthy business people for his ex-wife's debts and his own use.
d) Using his position as British Trade Envoy to make and use links with people like the dodgy bloke in Khazikstan who bought the wreck of the house Andrew and Sarah Ferguson once owned for £3 million above the asking price - which went straight into Andrew's bank account as the house was by then his- when it had been on the market firyears with no interest.
e) Taking 10% of all profits from the young businesses helped by his supposed 'charity' 'Pitch at the Palace'.
f) Appearing in the BBC interview and being pompous and arrogant enough to believe his crass performance would get him out of the mess he has created.
g) Promising to help the investigation by the FBI and then refusing to.
h) Allowing his lawyers to use the defence of criticising and belittling Virginia Guiffre and him wriggling at every turn to not answer this case.

These behaviours have humilated HM the Queen as monarch by putting her in an invidious position and involving the monarchy to this horrible scandal.. He has, imho, probably speeded up the end of the monarchy in this country.

In terms of removing his titles, the ones that should be removed by HM immediately as they are in her gift alone are : KG, GCVO. He should never be a Knight if the Garter again. Nor should he have the GCVO which is given for 'distinguished personal service to the monarch'. It is laughable that he retains these titles and shameful.

@AcrossthePond55

I agree with most of your post, but in regard to your claim that the US does not "selectively protect its own vs citizens of other countries' I have two words to say to you:

Anne Sacoolas.

It is laughable that he retains these titles and shameful.

It would be if he hadn’t been stripped of them.

@Blossomtoes

It is laughable that he retains these titles and shameful.

It would be if he hadn’t been stripped of them.

@LuluBlakey1 is correct in her post.

Andrew retains KG and GCVO. He also retains the military title of Vice Admiral (suspect Admiral of Vice might be better).

Not according to this morning’s ^Telegraph.

12. The Garter star. Introduced in the 17th century by Charles I, it is a colourfully enamelled depiction of the heraldic shield of St George’s Cross, encircled by the Garter, which is itself encircled by an eight-point silver badge. Since the Garter is the senior order of the UK, a member will wear its star above any others – LOSE
13. Underneath the Garter star is the star of a Knight Grand Cross – LOSE

[quote DeliriaSkibbly]@AcrossthePond55

I agree with most of your post, but in regard to your claim that the US does not "selectively protect its own vs citizens of other countries' I have two words to say to you:

Anne Sacoolas.[/quote]
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-northamptonshire-59996219

Next week's court appearance of Anne Sacoolas over the death of motorcyclist Harry Dunn has been postponed.

Mr Dunn, 19, died in a crash with a car near RAF Croughton, Northamptonshire, on 27 August 2019.

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) said the delay was to allow "ongoing" discussions with the legal team of US national Mrs Sacoolas

..

Although the mind bending incompetence and obfuscation of the UK authorities in this matter should really be the focus here.

@Blossomtoes

Not according to this morning’s ^Telegraph.

12. The Garter star. Introduced in the 17th century by Charles I, it is a colourfully enamelled depiction of the heraldic shield of St George’s Cross, encircled by the Garter, which is itself encircled by an eight-point silver badge. Since the Garter is the senior order of the UK, a member will wear its star above any others – LOSE
13. Underneath the Garter star is the star of a Knight Grand Cross – LOSE

Interesting. His Wikipedia page (not the best authority, I know) has been edited today and removed many of his titles but left those two intact.

I do think the Torygraph is more likely to be accurate so I stand corrected :)

@DGRossetti

I agree the UK has been incompetent and clearly we let her go but the US has refused to extradite her back, and was instrumental in whisking her out of the country PDQ. I would note that her court appearance was to be via a video link - she's not coming back to the UK to face the music.

So I stand by my assertion that the US does protect it's own citizens.

[quote DeliriaSkibbly]@DGRossetti

I agree the UK has been incompetent and clearly we let her go but the US has refused to extradite her back, and was instrumental in whisking her out of the country PDQ. I would note that her court appearance was to be via a video link - she's not coming back to the UK to face the music.

So I stand by my assertion that the US does protect it's own citizens.[/quote]
It's not just that. It's this "confusion" over whether it was her own immunity from prosecution not "diplomatic immunity" that was in play at the time rather than her husbands.

And all of that matters. Why were these people granted immunity from prosecution in the UK over the job they were doing for the US. Because while that job may not have involved going around bumping off UK citizens wth impunity, that is certainly how it ended up.

So the real question is how many more potential US killers are there walking our streets (you'd hope they wouldn't drive anymore) with immunity from prosecution ?

That’s really refreshing @DeliriaSkibbly. Someone admitting they might be wrong on MN is like sighting a unicorn!

[quote DeliriaSkibbly]@DGRossetti

I agree the UK has been incompetent and clearly we let her go but the US has refused to extradite her back, and was instrumental in whisking her out of the country PDQ. I would note that her court appearance was to be via a video link - she's not coming back to the UK to face the music.

So I stand by my assertion that the US does protect it's own citizens.[/quote]
The UK government deliberately let her go.

The UK government deliberately let her go.

And then made it look like incompetence. Which was too easy, really.

Meanwhile, get a decimal point wrong on a benefits claim, and you can freeze to death.

Funny old world, innit ?

In the photo of the two of them with arms around each others waist, she looks like the cat that has the cream, definately no look of a rabbit caught in the head lights. She was seventeen, not exactly a naive age in this day and time. I dont condone P A but am wondering if all these accusations in court are happening with the other men she says have taken advantage of her

I'm really surprised that a commentator suggested that the RF's assets are at risk if there is a judgment for the plaintiff. As @AcrossthePond55 posted, unless there is a transfer of the defendants assets to avoid collection of a judgment, a successful plaintiff can collect only against the defendant. If there is a fraudulent transfer, they can go after the assets that are held by the transferee.

@cassie2and2

In the photo of the two of them with arms around each others waist, she looks like the cat that has the cream, definately no look of a rabbit caught in the head lights. She was seventeen, not exactly a naive age in this day and time. I dont condone P A but am wondering if all these accusations in court are happening with the other men she says have taken advantage of her

And here we go again - victim blaming.

Firstly, it wasn't in this 'day and time' was it ?

Secondly, are you not able to think of how Maxwell (a convicted sex trafficker) and Epstein (a convicted paedophile) might threaten her and tell her to smile or else ? Bearing in mind she's 17 and alone in a foreign country under their auspices.

Thirdly, with the other men she might not have enough evidence to sue them.

This has all been said time and time again and I'm depressed that STILL there are women trotting this sad old shit out again and again and again.

@DGRossetti

The UK government deliberately let her go.

And then made it look like incompetence. Which was too easy, really.

Meanwhile, get a decimal point wrong on a benefits claim, and you can freeze to death.

Funny old world, innit ?

Definitely.

How many of us were very mature at 17 and wouldn't have been flattered by the attentions of an older man?

@cassie2and2

In the photo of the two of them with arms around each others waist, she looks like the cat that has the cream, definately no look of a rabbit caught in the head lights. She was seventeen, not exactly a naive age in this day and time. I dont condone P A but am wondering if all these accusations in court are happening with the other men she says have taken advantage of her

She was 17 and had been groomed by Maxwell. Stop victim blaming. If you came from a poor, chaotic background and a millionaire and his girlfriend paid you hundreds of pounds, flew you round the world in a private jet, took you to huge luxury houses, introduced to to famous, important people and showed you it was ok to have sex with them, I doubt you'd be strong enough to say no. I doubt you'd know where the line was anymore.

@Blossomtoes

It is laughable that he retains these titles and shameful.

It would be if he hadn’t been stripped of them.

He has not been stripped of his Knight of the Garter or his GCVO or his CD (which was given by the Canadian government). He should be stripped of all of them.

And he’s still the Duke of York.

PA has not actually been found guilty of anything yet so seems premature and quite shocking for his own family to throw him under a bus so readily to save their own backs

I get the principle and agree that he's not formally been found guilty, but this ignores the point that the RF operate mainly on how things look (or more realistically how they can be made to look, since if we knew the full truth about many of them they'd probably have been got rid of years ago)
This public image isn't something that just sort of happens; they work on it all the time, and for decades Andrew's done it a whole lot of no good

Through arrogance, entitlement and too much dubious influence they've always managed to conceal or brush aside his worst excesses instead of reining him in, but now they're having to do it anyway because of circumstances which even they can't ignore

And that's the nub of why some of us have no respect at all for the institution, including (in fact especially) the Queen, who has the authority to have stopped him long ago even if she continued to support him privately

@cassie2and2

In the photo of the two of them with arms around each others waist, she looks like the cat that has the cream, definately no look of a rabbit caught in the head lights. She was seventeen, not exactly a naive age in this day and time. I dont condone P A but am wondering if all these accusations in court are happening with the other men she says have taken advantage of her

Maybe if you look it up instead of wondering you’ll see that yes, she has made accusations against the other men as well.

Also, at the risk of being a legal pedant, in a civil case in the US, the defendant is found "liable," rather than "guilty." The burden of proof is lower in a civil case, so it's an important distinction.

@Blossomtoes

Not according to this morning’s ^Telegraph.

12. The Garter star. Introduced in the 17th century by Charles I, it is a colourfully enamelled depiction of the heraldic shield of St George’s Cross, encircled by the Garter, which is itself encircled by an eight-point silver badge. Since the Garter is the senior order of the UK, a member will wear its star above any others – LOSE
13. Underneath the Garter star is the star of a Knight Grand Cross – LOSE

According to The Times today, he has had neither removed and retains both. There is no change announced on The Royal Family website which is where changes are announced to KG and GCVO.

Some of these comments show that things don't change. No matter who the victim is,or the accused, or the circumstances, same old spiel.

It didn't happen.
If it happened , it wasn't that bad.
If it was bad, it wasn't his fault.
And repeat.