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 see Fergie was in the car with A - she must have something to do with all of this or is it she's just worried about losing her income ?

I kinda think they wouldn't be going on holiday with Sarah Ferguson if they weren't all right with it all. They don't need scraps from her table. Quite the reverse!

The Daily Mail was printing its usual scurrilous stories about one of the husbands (can't tell B from E) cheating while either B or E was recovering from having a baby, what, last year? Could be true, could be lies; anyway, the rich are different (bunga bunga!) and I doubt they are fazed by their father-in-laws peccadillos and sexual proclivities. I doubt they see penniless, untitled girls groomed by JE are anything but irrelevant nobodies.

I'd like to hear more about that other witness whom Virginia Guiffre apparently texted along the lines of, "She got to have sex with him." I wonder if this were technologically possible and whether there's any record of it.

Yes, it was technologically possible. Text messages have been around since the mid-1990s. However, I would be surprised if the original messages are still available 20+ years after the event.

Thanks pnh; I am a bit young to remember the state of communications in the 90s. So, if that witness swore she'd received that message under oath, that could be good for Andrew's case if his case were "the sex was consensual."

Do you think he'll stick to his guns about never having met Virginia if there is hard evidence to the contrary (beyond a photo at a party)? I can't really believe he'd lie under oath. According to this, you can get seven years for perjury in NY. criminaldefense.1800nynylaw.com/new-york-penal-law-210-15-perjury-in-the-first-degree.html

And would the court take any notice of his earlier public statements in the Newsnight interview at all (if the claimant tried to use them to show he'd changed his story), or would the focus solely be on what he said to the court under oath?

I can't really believe he'd lie under oath.
I imagine it would be very much non-answers. He'll try to beat around the bush a lot to avoid actually answering the question. I'd imagine that VG lawyers would soon realise this though, and quickly jump to squash it.
I think he'll just do some sort of statement for his lawyers to read out, and not actually show up (will he be allowed to do that?). In his situation, that will probably be for the best (his famous interview alone shows us that) - I think the public will view it as an admission of guilt though, if he doesn't show.

Why was he alloed to get away with so much, for so many years? Shouting at staff, and allowing friends to walk in and out of palaces without signing in? Was it just because he was the Queen's favourite, or were all the family allowed to follow the same low standards, and by-pass security policies? I'd be interested to know if Edward's, and William's and Harry's friends (as W&H grew up) were allowed to do this? Even Charles'?

In which case, a bigger question needs to be asked about the security system the RF has in place. Aren't we always told about how high risk they all are, as a justification for paying for security?

Re text messages they were certainly around 20 years ago, even 2000. VG may well have kept her old phones we don’t know what evidence she has. She kept the photo safe after all these years.

@prh47bridge

I'd like to hear more about that other witness whom Virginia Guiffre apparently texted along the lines of, "She got to have sex with him." I wonder if this were technologically possible and whether there's any record of it.

Yes, it was technologically possible. Text messages have been around since the mid-1990s. However, I would be surprised if the original messages are still available 20+ years after the event.

From (bitter) experience, on it's own an SMS message is of limited value unless you prove it can't have been sent by anyone else. And that's from yesterday, let alone 20 years gone.

Although this being a civil case, there may be an acceptance of probability rather than certainty ?

@JanuaryBluehoo

It doesn't ridgedly support Boris however like the guardian does.

Er ... have you ever read The Guardian?!

Biwi.
. Yes I used to read nothing but the guardian which is why I'm really worried about it now.
What I meant was, the mail doesn't mind attacking anyone but the guardian wouldn't attack dear leader

Front page of today's Guardian is attacking Boris. Following several days, weeks and months of attacking him.

@JanuaryBluehoo
".....It doesn't rigidly support Boris however like the guardian does ..........."

Did you mean to write The Telegraph ?
I'm not in the UK but was told The Telegraph is a Tory paper and The Guardian is definitely not

On the family... I do wonder what the newish husbands of B&E think

The thought had occurred to me

Hopefully their relationships can stand it, though Eduardo doesn't exactly have a track record of sticking around, or maybe the baubles will help to paper over any discontent

[quote LadyEloise1]@JanuaryBluehoo
".....It doesn't rigidly support Boris however like the guardian does ..........."

Did you mean to write The Telegraph ?
I'm not in the UK but was told The Telegraph is a Tory paper and The Guardian is definitely not [/quote]
If you asked your local newsagent for a copy of "The Torygraph" you would be given a copy of the Daily Telegraph.

(If you asked for a copy of "The Graniuad", you'd get a copy of the Guardian )

Nah, the Grauniad does help Boris. What's the expression? "Praising with faint damns."

Puzzled

Trouble is... the baubles might be a bit hidden for a while! Sins of the father and all that. Unfair I know.

Trouble is... the baubles might be a bit hidden for a while!

True enough, Roussette; as you say it's hardly fair for things to be taken out on "the girls", but even if it's considered necessary for them to keep their heads down a bit they still have a lifestyle most would envy

@AllThePogs

Lets face it, the teddy bear story would have been published if it was about anyone very famous, as it is so strange.

Maybe there was something in the teddy bears 🤔

On the family... I do wonder what the newish husbands of B&E think

I think it would be hard for either to claim they were walking into it with their eyes closed. Brooksbank and Eugenie were long term partners pre-marriage and the timeline certainly encompassed the growing scandal. Eduardo married Beatrice some seven months after his FIL to be stepped back in the wake of the Newsnight interview.

The baubles haven't stopped and won't even if they roll under the radar for a bit although I'm not holding my breath for that. See recent gameface ski holiday in £17m Chalet Posh.

Sky news have a report saying A's lawyers are asking for access to VG's counselling notes but have labelled her request of proof of him not sweating as harassment.

@Vapeyvapevape

Sky news have a report saying A's lawyers are asking for access to VG's counselling notes but have labelled her request of proof of him not sweating as harassment.

Seems money doesn't always buy competence here. All that has done is allowed this zinger into the webosphere:

Prince Andrew: Giuffre lawyer criticises health records request - saying people 'don't misremember sexual abuse by a prince of England

Yes, it does come across as if they could be attempting a hatchet job

And I think that's why HMQ was so clear in that statement that his action is as a private citizen. No blessing there for whatever he does next

Yes, it does come across as if they could be attempting a hatchet job

But surely it's conventional to try to hatchet your opponent, not your own client ?

I wonder if after all the Queen is paying Andrews legal team. They certainly seem to be confused about who they are supposed to be helping.

Is everyone ready for the itv pm show tonight? Can't wait to learn more about all these teddy bears and hippos. I doubt they'll turn up anything new, but it will only add to the ridicule.

I shall certainly be watching it.

I was interested it was on ITV as the RF gave BBC the cold shoulder over the Princes and the Press programme, and switched their allegiance to ITV with the Kate carol concert.
And now ITV are broadcasting this... they'll be running out of TV channels soon!

ooh yes what time is it on? ( too lazy to google)