Prince Andrew Thread 3

[Roussette]

Here is the previous thread...

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/the_royal_family/4443261-Prince-Andrew-Thread-2?watched=1&msgid=114083283#114083283

I think it's a question of contract law. Setting precedents etc. Business is not going to be happy if contracts are easy to break.

Doubtful! Especially as the judge has form for coming down hard on corrupt litigants who bribe judges and try to pervert the course of justice! (the Donziger case) Also, he presided over a trial related to the Gambino crime family. If he isn't scared of the Mafia, I don't think Andrew is going to make him quake in his boots.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_A._Kaplan

@CathyorClaire

Some old people will care. My father does not have Netflix or Amazon Prime. He will grumble a lot...mainly to me

Likewise.

DM thinks the sun shines out of HMQ's arse but she wasn't impressed with the wall to wall Philip circus and that I suspect was a mere dry run for the big one.

If there are any anti-monarchists in the unbiased BBC they would have known that if they put wall to wall PP on BBC 1, 2, 4, News and Parliament that would annoy half the population at least and there would be enough dickheads among them to attribute the saturation coverage to some imagined command by the RF and subconsciously blame them instead of blaming the silly BBC. There are many more channels to be found. No-one in this country had to watch anything about PP if he/she didn't want to. It was ridiculous of the BBC to put PP on every one of their channels, absolutely ridiculous, but I do not blame the Queen for it.

@upinaballoon I thought it was the official requirement for the BBC to do that. It is always mentioned in articles about state funerals.

I didn't know the judge had dealt with a Mafia trial. That makes me feel more confident that he won't be successfully leaned on.

@DuncinToffee

The ultimate sweat test

Genius

@AllThePogs

I didn't know the judge had dealt with a Mafia trial. That makes me feel more confident that he won't be successfully leaned on.

That makes me wonder how deep organised crimes talons are into the royal family too.

Hoping today's the day .

I do not blame the Queen for it

Me neither. I was trying to say (obviously badly) even ardent royalists thought the coverage was overkill. I do however think it will have been used as a test run for the media version of London Bridge.

That makes me wonder how deep organised crimes talons are into the royal family too

Kazakhstan, Saudi Arabia etc etc etc etc etc

@NiceShrubbery

That makes me wonder how deep organised crimes talons are into the royal family too

Kazakhstan, Saudi Arabia etc etc etc etc etc

The UKs toadying up to Saudi Arabia is particularly stomach churning.

In geopolitics, the reduction in dependence of the US on imported Saudi oil has left the Saudis keen to maximise what leverage they have left. Making countries with pisspoor energy planning a very soft target for Saudi influence.

Although don't kid yourselves the UK sucks up to Saudi Arabia because it needs to. It damn well likes to.

I presume PAs lawyers are throwing everything they've got at it? Would there be a chance for them to influence anything?

I can't pretend the thought hadn't occurred to me

It may be unlikely, but it wouldn't be the first time a judge had caved in to pressure, and as prh47 mentioned he's not been without scandal in the past

@Rousette I agree it's an eye-opener but I thought it was written in almost reverential tones and colored by an assumption that everyone in the country would be mired in grief. Is the MJM expecting the mass weeping in the streets that followed Diana's death? I wonder which of the economic predictions will actually come to pass. In the current economic climate, I can't see much appetite for closing the country down - again.

Pure speculation from someone that knows nothing about US law but I can't help agreeing with PP that said they feel the length of time it's taking is judge trying to find a legal way to block PAs defence but struggling.

@idiotfacelicker

Pure speculation from someone that knows nothing about US law but I can't help agreeing with PP that said they feel the length of time it's taking is judge trying to find a legal way to block PAs defence but struggling.

That suggests a judge with an agenda, which while not unheard of, would be a shame in this case.

It could also be the judge is ensuring every single i is dotted and t crossed with references and precedents - whichever way they decide.

We only have to look closer to home to see the incredible political pressure judges are under and the only way to tackle that is to be totally note-perfect.

Fabulous news coming out now...

@PlanktonsComputerWife

Fabulous news coming out now...

that would be very convenient for b.j.

It doesn't suggest he has an agenda, it suggests he found one sides a arguments in the hearing more persuasive.

He's going to have to go to court!

So I win worst timed post ever??

Haha idiotface

I had faith in the judge. He seems like a grumpy old bollocks.

Bet PA is sweating now!

Brilliant news!!!!! So pleased to hear this news. So does this mean the hearing will go ahead regardless of whether he turns up or not?

Fabulous news! I bet the RF are super pissed one of their own may actually be held accountable… if only in a civil trial not, unfortunately, a criminal one.

Bloody brilliant news!