Prince Andrew thoughts

[Reduceddutiesboredom]

Maybe he’ll stop hiding behind his mummy now…

"While Andrew insisted in a previous statement that he was “willing to help if required” in the investigation, it is claimed he has so far failed to co-operate with New York and federal officials.

The FBI has allegedly been trying to interview the under-fire royal since November.

As pressure continues to mount on the Queen's second son to explain himself, Sun royal author Phil Dampier warns it could be too late, saying: "His reputation is in tatters and I honestly don't know how easy it is for him to rescue it now.""

www.thesun.co.uk/news/9845178/prince-andrew-epstein-scandal-zero-help-questions/

Serenster Because if they start formally investigating PA, they would have to do the same for Clinton, Trump & Co, there are plane trips and logs for them too. Fewer witnesses for Clinton as JE would clear the house of people before he arrived. This is why JE is dead/disappeared.

Nowhere does that article say that “ Prince Andrew refused to speak to investigators who flew over from the United States” as you claim, Julieca

@ChurchofLatterDayPaints

Serenster Because if they start formally investigating PA, they would have to do the same for Clinton, Trump & Co, there are plane trips and logs for them too. Fewer witnesses for Clinton as JE would clear the house of people before he arrived. This is why JE is dead/disappeared.

They don’t though. Prosecutors can absolutely cherry pick who they want to go after.

Yes I know, they also design plea bargains and order inconvenient witnesses to be shot and strangled, to appease their paymasters. Especially in Florida. (Acosta 2009). Clinton bodycount.

So in the end, what does it matter, whether a bunch of puppets in wigs and gowns decide whether PA is guilty or not?

Surely, it's better for people to stop tolerating this filth.

@Serenster I said most of the news articles seem to have been removed. There were loads at the time.
Andrew is obviously guilty as hell. And the Queen should not be supporting him.

Of course there were, julieca. (It never happened).

@julieca

Yes but that is wrong. I dont become immune from a court case because my dad is ill.

I don’t think the issue is so much personal sympathy for the Queen as self preservation.

Attaching your name to an arrest warrant as the country enters a state of national mourning would not be a good political move.

@Serenster dont accuse me of lying.
Yes the RF get away with stuff because of who they are. Anyone else would have been arrested.

There is absolutely nothing to suggest that FBI investigators have come to the UK to interview Andrew, julieca. I pointed out that that is not the way things work in practice, and you posted a link to a news article that actually confirms that - the US authorities have made an official request for mutual assistance from the UK Authorities (the proper way of doing things, where the UK Authorities use their own powers and resources to fulfill the overseas request).

Your response to this is that news articles confirming what you said have been removed from the internet. Which is quite an extraordinary claim. Why, and by whom? IThe FBI has not been shy in breaching confidentiality and making its own statements about the Prince’s co-operation (or lack of it) so where is their statement about this?

Yes the RF get away with stuff because of who they are. Anyone else would have been arrested

This completely sums up the past 12 threads on the RF. They are crooks and won't be stopped till they're forced out.

@Serenster

Of course there were, julieca. (It never happened).

Please don’t derail what has been an otherwise positive and respectful thread by being rude like that, it’s really unnecessary

cany. If this was just a minute, I would say that Serenster had a made a correct challenge. She hasn't been rude, just stated that those articles aren't necessarily fact.

@SallyLockheart but it wasn’t the challenge about the articles I took issue with, it was the specific post I quoted, which was unnecessary, and I believe rude. You can have robust debate without posts like that. I do not want to derail this thread, but I will call out a bit of a shitty post when I see it.

@Theunamedcat

The queen hasn't defended him she has supported him like any parent would

I see this kind of sentiment come up a lot on these threads in defence of the Queen, and I don’t understand it at all. There’s two issues I have with it - firstly the assumption that she’s just doing what any of us mothers would do, and secondly, talking about her as if she is just a normal mother.

So, on the first point, I can tell you absolutely that if my DC did what PA did, then actually no, I wouldn’t be supporting him in the way the Queen is - I would be making it clear to everyone who knew us that my DC’s actions were utterly unacceptable, and that whilst I would stand by my child, I would be making them engage fully with any legal process, and I would be locking them in their metaphorical bedroom until they’d learnt to behave themselves.

Instead, the Queen has continued to publicly spoil her son. Nothing in her actions shows me she gives two shits about what PA is accused of doing or that he has been in anyway reprimanded. And that’s why, to her shame, she has now become complicit in this.

And all that supposes she is just a ‘normal parent’, and this leads me to the other issue with your post - the Queen is not a ‘normal’ parent is she - she is the head of state, and as such, she has a responsibility to show leadership. The Royal Family love to bang on about duty and how they must put that duty before everything. Well, the Queen has a duty to the country first and foremost, and not her spoilt petulant son - and so she should be showing the country that she supports a full and fair legal process and that PA will of course be engaging fully with the authorities. Instead, she has consistently reinforced PA’s denials….

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30670837.amp

And don’t even get me started on the fact that she’s also using our money to bankroll his defence. Further evidence of a total lack of leadership on this issue. Perhaps she could have started with making him sell his foreign properties?

pagesix.com/2021/09/27/prince-andrew-to-sell-swiss-property-to-settle-ongoing-lawsuit/

Apparently that was the last foreign property, now he'll have to make do with squatting at Windsor, or Balmoral when the process servers arrive.

Yes we are always told the RF put duty before everything else. If that was true the Queen would have made very different choices about Andrew.
She need not have been nasty, simply not carried out all the shows of support for Andrew. A much more neutral stance would have been much more advisable.

@ChurchofLatterDayPaints seriously, how many people end up having to sue that man!?!

This sale was meant to be going through quite a while ago, maybe it's stalled again

The legal fees which the Queen is paying will be absolutely horrendous. Just one of the US guys he has hired is over £3,000 an hour. I would imagine the total bill which will roll on and on will reach millions

@canyoutoleratethis
I agree. Particularly your second paragraph

Yes julieca I agree. If she was bona fide she'd also have made sure that PA himself made very different choices over the past 25 years after leaving the Forces, in the name of "duty". Instead of fretting about Kate and Meghan's skirt lengths and colour of tights, and how many people she can fit on the balcony.

@ChurchofLatterDayPaints the general rules in the RF though seems to be to worry about areas of protocol no one else cares about like the colour of tights and ignore immoral and criminal behaviour.

news.sky.com/story/prince-andrew-us-judge-sets-january-hearing-for-duke-of-yorks-lawyers-in-sexual-abuse-civil-case-12460371

US district judge Lewis Kaplan has scheduled the hearing of Virginia Giuffre's case for 4 January.
He issued the scheduling one day after saying he expected the civil case to go to trial between September and December next year, provided it is not settled or dismissed.

That will doubtless be another (what we would call in the UK) case management conference to see how things are progressing against the timetable set by the judge at the last one - I wouldn’t get your hopes up that anything exciting will come out of it!

Ha! That will teach me to post without actually reading the article .

Turns out it’s the hearing of Prince Andrew’s application to dismiss her claim (a bit like Meghan’s summary judgment application she made against ANL, but in reverse - a claimant can apply for summary judgement if the defence is too weak to succeed, while a defendant can apply for the claim against them to be dismissed/struck out).