Prince Andrew taken back into the fold this weekend.

[Wishiwasinmalta]

AIBU or will the popularity of the RF drop like a lead balloon if they keep on doing this?

I popped back to this thread after a few days and see you’re still obsessed with that figure, when there is no evidence to support that whatsoever and there were reports in the summer that actually it was more around £3m to £5m.

The point is no one knows, it’s all rumours.

I popped back to this thread after a few days and see you’re still obsessed with that figure, when there is no evidence to support that whatsoever and there were reports in the summer that actually it was more around £3m to £5m.

Theres lots of evidence, which I posted.

I haven't seen any reference apart from posts on this thread to 3 million, but if we don't need to substantiate anything, I can play that game too, let's call it 100 million. Pretty sure I read an interview where she confirmed that, six months ago 🤔

You posted reports, not evidence, even in the form of this alleged interview.

I can post reports too, but it’s not evidence.

The point is no one knows and all these figures being thrown around is pure speculation. Reports in the press from “sources” is not evidence.

But if we’re going to rely on stories in the media, for completeness:

www.thesun.co.uk/news/19439810/prince-andrew-pay-off-virginia-giuffre/amp/

You posted reports, not evidence, even in the form of this alleged interview

The piece in the Telegraph (linked above) cites 12 million and also cites the Queen helping to pay. It reports on all that as fact, with no caveats or mitigating language at all.

That has never been retracted or corrected.

So perfectly clear.

A newspaper report is still not evidence.

Can you provide a copy of the settlement agreement? Or either PA or VG or their lawyers confirming the settlement?

What you’re providing and relying on is nothing but a story.

He was not convicted of anything

I hope your brother is never accused of anything as you will condemn him immediately

What you’re providing and relying on is nothing but a story.

No. It's an account, in the press, reported as fact and never challenged, retracted or corrected.

According to you, everything in the press is just a 'story' so what's the point of it then? Why do we have courts of law or reporting guidance bodies that ensure false information doesn't stand?

I hope your brother is never accused of anything as you will condemn him immediately

She might wait until he'd shelled out 12 mill in hush money. Perhaps.

Whereas you’re providing your own random post on the internet and seem entirely ignorant of accurate press reporting standards - especially in relation to the Royals.

not exactly a compelling counter argument!

If my brothers best mate was a sex trafficker and convicted child sex offender I’d definitely have nothing to do with him.

maybe you’d welcome child sex offender friends into your family @LakieLady but many of us don’t think it’s an unreasonable line to draw

Errr, that is exactly my point! The £3m is as much as a story as the £12m. No one actually knows.

The 12 million was very widely reported at the time. By mainstream quality newspapers as well as tabloids.

Do you and @FurAndFeathers genuinely believe the press report accurately when it comes to gossip? All they have to say is refer to something as “sources say” or put it in quotation marks and they can write whatever they like.

I guess your blind trust of the press explains a lot.

Meanwhile I’m still waiting for you to provide me evidence of the criminal charges that you say were filed when you claimed I didn’t understand what had happened…

Errr, that is exactly my point! The £3m is as much as a story as the £12m.

No. In what you've shared, the source is an unnamed person speaking off the record who says it 'may be' as low as 3 million.

The telegraph reports the 12 million as fact, with no caveats/mitigating language and that account has not been challenged in any way and allowed to stand. Even though it would very much have been in the RF's interests to have that corrected if they had the facts to support that.

Its clear what's going on. What you posted was a clear attempt to muddy the waters for uncritical readers. But one unnamed/off the record source has no credibility at all.

All they have to say is refer to something as “sources say” or put it in quotation marks and they can write whatever they like.

Thats what your link references.

The Telegraph language is nothing like that.

Are you actually serious? Have you read the article properly?

If you can’t see the way the Telegraph has reported it to try and determine it as fact, then I think you need to add yourself to the uncritical reader list.

The 12 million was referenced by multiple sources in the British press and beyond. If the royals could have demanded corrects/retractions of course they would have.

Who wanted the 'oh he doesn't have 12 mill, will the Queen bail him out and will she use public money to do so?' conversation if it could have been avoided?

The whole situation was plenty bad enough without that.

So , if something is reported in a newspaper and not challenged , is it a fact ?

According to the many posters on this thread, it looks like it!

Are you actually serious? Have you read the article properly?

Yup. I have.

So why didn't they demand a retraction /corrector for this and multiple accounts published?

Why let the conversation evolve into 'will he go cap in hand to the Queen, cause we all know he's no good for this?'

So , if something is reported in a newspaper and not challenged , is it a fact ?

Presumably in lots of cases, people don't bother challenging.

But retractions and corrections are printed all the time. So why wouldn't the royals do that on this instance? Letting it stand was really damaging to them.

Well seeing as I don’t work for the RF I can’t comment on their decision making, but I assume maybe it’s because they wanted to move on from it, and the more they correct the story, the longer the story will drag on, including suggestions that if they corrected this, why didn’t they correct other allegations, and so forth.

I mean there could be several reasons other than it must be true.

Have H and M sued Tom Bower and Valentine Low yet ? Or demanded an apology?

Well seeing as I don’t work for the RF I can’t comment on their decision making, but I assume maybe it’s because they wanted to move on from it, and the more they correct the story, the longer the story will drag on

That doesn't stack up at all. The story graduated into round two, will the Queen bail him out and will it take public money to do so?

A firm correction would have been much better in terms of shutting it down. Press release, this is how much the settlement actually was, no further comments.

But instead of doing that, they let 12 million, having to be bailed out by his mum around the world. 🤨