Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

The royal family

Prince Andrew has bolted to Balmoral

999 replies

Viviennemary · 08/09/2021 10:30

This according to guess who. The DM of course. To avoid getting papers served says the article. Maybe he's just gone for a nice break. Accompanied by Fergie.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
11
dontyouwish2 · 15/09/2021 19:45

Glad to hear the legal system in the UK will help, they have been hands off too much on this case.

Serenster · 15/09/2021 19:46

Tell that to the Dunn family, @ChurchofLatterDayPaints

Serenster · 15/09/2021 19:48

Honestly, it is in everyone’s interest to get this right. Not serving the initial claim properly will absolutely scupper Virginia Robert’s ability to enforce a judgment in the UK, should she get that far.

ChurchofLatterDayPaints · 15/09/2021 20:02

@Serenster

Tell that to the Dunn family, *@ChurchofLatterDayPaints*
You might want a separate thread for that one.

Prince Andrew has no good outcome from this.

He knew how those girls got there, and he thought it was his divine right to have his way with them.

mathanxiety · 15/09/2021 20:03

There is no way PA and his legal team didn't know he was about to be served. The case was filed, and service occurs asap thereafter in both the US and UK.

They chose to dispute service instead of doing the honorable thing.

This case is going to be a well deserved public relations disaster regardless of the eventual judgement.

Serenster · 15/09/2021 20:21

As I’ve said several times already, the PR battle around Prince Andrew is well lost and is probably not worth even trying to win back (I think it’s impossible. All these people saying he should do the “honourable” thing - as if that would make the slightest bit of difference!). The best case scenario for him really is to get rid of this lawsuit, and fight a tactical battle to achieve that.

Roussette · 15/09/2021 20:28

What is a tactical battle though?

Serenster · 15/09/2021 20:30

Taking every possible point around process.

Serenster · 15/09/2021 20:34

Which I completely get, looks unattractive to an onlooker. But it’s the nature of the process - litigation is a series of picky, aggressively fought battles, but that is the nature of the beast.

It gives Virginia Roberts the leverage to force a financial settlement out of Prince Andrew if he thinks his reputation is salvageable and it’s better to put this behind him and move on. But it’s not a process she is in control of, and if he is bullish and determined he will never settle she can expect several years of expensive, draining court battles. There is a reason why lawyers tend to advise their clients to avoid litigation if possible.

Roussette · 15/09/2021 20:37

BG has a backbone and she's doing it not just for her, but all the other victims.
I hope she persists

Roussette · 15/09/2021 21:00

VG

Nightlystroll · 15/09/2021 21:12

There's nothing honourable about going to court. Haha. If you get caught by a speed camera and the notice isn't sent within 14 days, the case is null and void. I don't believe posters would just put on their big boy pants and do the honourable thing by going to court despite them not needing to. It's the claimant's responsibility to sort it, not the defendant's.

SpindleWhorl · 15/09/2021 21:34

I admit fully my judgement was probably coloured by my tendency to be too honourable but that's just the way it is.

His words.

Nightlystroll · 15/09/2021 21:45

@SpindleWhorl. 😂😂😂 Are you stalking him that you can quote him? Step away from the thread for a day or two.
There's honourable and stupid. You'd have to be stupid to go to court if you don't need to. As soon as he's in court he's lost even if he wins the case. Whereas she has won even if she loses the case. So best case scenario for him is to avoid court altogether.

SpindleWhorl · 15/09/2021 21:50

No, I'm quoting from a very famous interview that showed the talent of Emily Maitlis from BBC Newsnight.

youvegottenminuteslynn · 15/09/2021 21:51

[quote Nightlystroll]@SpindleWhorl. 😂😂😂 Are you stalking him that you can quote him? Step away from the thread for a day or two.
There's honourable and stupid. You'd have to be stupid to go to court if you don't need to. As soon as he's in court he's lost even if he wins the case. Whereas she has won even if she loses the case. So best case scenario for him is to avoid court altogether.[/quote]
Eh? It's not stalking to quote someone's words about a specific topic when the thread is specifically about them and the topic...

Porridgealert · 15/09/2021 21:53

But to be able to bring them so quickly to mind...

MummyJ12 · 15/09/2021 21:54

Your analogy is slightly wrong Nightlystroll, in that (if this were for a speeding offence) it’s more like PA has been issued the Notice for Intended Prosecution within the 14 day period, but he has ignored it. When the case is eventually brought to court, his counsel argue that he didn’t receive the letter. Only a fool would ignore such a notice. Like PA.

youvegottenminuteslynn · 15/09/2021 21:55

@Porridgealert

But to be able to bring them so quickly to mind...
Is there nothing anyone has said that you can remember distinctly if you felt strongly about it when it was said?

Or could remember the vague quote then took five seconds to Google it?

It's not that unusual a thing to do.

Nightlystroll · 15/09/2021 21:55

@youvegottenminuteslynn. She just seems to have had them memorised. But maybe you're all into this far more than me?
Anyway that's just my opinion from a legal point of view. I'll leave you all to it.

Porridgealert · 15/09/2021 21:57

@youvegottenminuteslynn
Is there nothing anyone has said that you can remember distinctly if you felt strongly about it when it was said?

To directly quote someone I don't know from an interview months ago? No.

youvegottenminuteslynn · 15/09/2021 21:58

[quote Nightlystroll]@youvegottenminuteslynn. She just seems to have had them memorised. But maybe you're all into this far more than me?
Anyway that's just my opinion from a legal point of view. I'll leave you all to it.[/quote]
Yes maybe some people are more invested than you in the topic and / or have better memories / Google stuff quickly to get specific quotes if they remember something being said.

youvegottenminuteslynn · 15/09/2021 21:58

[quote Porridgealert]@youvegottenminuteslynn
Is there nothing anyone has said that you can remember distinctly if you felt strongly about it when it was said?

To directly quote someone I don't know from an interview months ago? No.[/quote]
You've cut the rest of my comments about Google allowing you to find a direct quote in a matter of seconds...

Aspiringmatriarch · 15/09/2021 21:58

It was a standout quote from the interview along with not being able to sweat and when asked if he regretted the Epstein friendship, "Still not." Nothing strange about remembering it!

SpindleWhorl · 15/09/2021 22:00

M'lud, in order to satisfy the defence, I had the phrase in my mind as being a memorable one, elicited from the putative defendant by the awesome Maitlis; and I used the almighty power of google which took approximately 10 seconds on my tablet to cut and paste it here.

Swipe left for the next trending thread