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

Thanks blossom.... knew there was a trust involved

I think we'll need a new thread to cope with Ghislaine, Prince Andrew and the Paedophile

There already is one, @Redshoeblueshoe ...

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/the_royal_family/4456492-itv-documentary-about-andrew-and-ghislaine

Thank you

How did any young girls get into Tramp with its strict over 18s policy or did no one care and only money and fame matters.

It was that sort of place

A private members club for the rich and famous who can probably take in who they want

www.tramp.co.uk/

It's rule from its founding in 1969 is
"What goes on in Tramp, stays in Tramp"

@Mamamia7962

Nottodaybatman - I thought the Queen Mother's Debts were settled from her estate, not by the Queen.

The debts were (amazingly for the spendthrift lifestyle she enjoyed) some £7m when QM died. Brenda saved around £20m in inheritance tax under the sovereign to sovereign bequest jolly so whoever paid the debts she still got a stonking deal.

QM's extravagant lifestyle has direct resonance with the grasping entitlement exhibited by her ghastly grandson albeit minus the unsavoury acquaintances:

www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-506198/The-Empress-Extravagance-How-Queen-Mother-left-7m-debts.html

@Roussette

It's rule from its founding in 1969 is "What goes on in Tramp, stays in Tramp"

And we all though 'Fight Club' was the original

It's not so easy to bury what they want to anymore.... it does make me wonder about decades ago, before SM, what we don't know

It's not really that long since the deal was struck with the Fleet St editors to hide the stories about Edward VIII and Wallis Simpson from the British public.

There's even a little clip of her at the window with him at his proclamation that has an overlay of "Not to be used, by order of King Edward".

Although it's for very different reasons there's the agreement at the moment about the royal children and not photographing the families when they are out and about. You see more photos of the Cambridges and the Wessexes etc out doing normal family stuff in magazines abroad than you do here.
It's unlikely they'd suppress other things, but you never know really.

@nottodaybatman

Well the QM died with large debts and they were settled by the Queen.

If huge damages were awarded, say $50m
(Made up) basically a number big enough that Andrew cannot pay. I can not see him hiding in plain sight in Windsor, Balmoral for Xmas etc with the RF repeatedly stating that they are not paying a penny towards it.

Will and Kate are constantly hinting they want to go the US for earth shot or some state visit or other. That is incompatible with Andrew not paying... basically this is bad for the firm and family.

The Daily Mail has alleged that the Queen Mother died with large debts. Whilst this has been repeated elsewhere, there doesn't appear to be any other source for this allegation. The Daily Mail alleged that the Queen settled the debts. As the Queen Mother's estate was not insolvent, this is clearly rubbish. Her debts would have been paid from her estate.

One of the things I can say with confidence about US law is that the Royal Family (and individual members of the family) are not liable for any amount VG is awarded. If Andrew can't afford to pay or refuses to do so, it does not give VG any basis for a claim against the Queen or any other member of the family. The Queen may choose to bail Andrew out, but she cannot be forced to do so. I do not see any reason why Andrew not paying would prevent a visit to the US by William and Kate.

@JanuaryBluehoo

I'm confused I thought people on here said the daily mail ridgedly supported the royals? The article is I think quoting the TV program that's coming out?

I've just found the mail reflects what's going on at the time, so if you look there is lots of fun poked at Boris, lots of serious pieces about Boris and some balance there.
It doesn't ridgedly support Boris however like the guardian does... Or have totally titled optics deeply political like the guardian.

Lol!!!! Very funny.

@nottodaybatman

Well the QM died with large debts and they were settled by the Queen.

If huge damages were awarded, say $50m
(Made up) basically a number big enough that Andrew cannot pay. I can not see him hiding in plain sight in Windsor, Balmoral for Xmas etc with the RF repeatedly stating that they are not paying a penny towards it.

Will and Kate are constantly hinting they want to go the US for earth shot or some state visit or other. That is incompatible with Andrew not paying... basically this is bad for the firm and family.

It's quite hilarious isn't it? Very funny to watch the lot of them squirm.

I do not see any reason why Andrew not paying would prevent a visit to the US by William and Kate

Because of the optics. It wouldn't go down well I don't think. Just my humble opinion of course

The Daily Mail has alleged that the Queen Mother died with large debts. Whilst this has been repeated elsewhere, there doesn't appear to be any other source for this allegation. The Daily Mail alleged that the Queen settled the debts. As the Queen Mother's estate was not insolvent, this is clearly rubbish. Her debts would have been paid from her estate.

Lol. The sources are many. A more accurate explanation of the RF's and QM's finances can be found here:

www.theguardian.com/uk/2002/apr/03/queenmother.monarchy2

See in particular Norman Baker's "And what do you do" and Royal Legacy by the author David McClure.

But that article says she created a trust fund to maximise the inheritance / minimise the tax on that amount.

That's very different from creating a trust specifically to defraud your creditors

Did anyone see that ITV documentary last night? Just tittle tattle or was there any interesting stuff?

There was nothing we didn't know before, Planktons; it was mainly a group of, in their words, "Epstein survivors" doing pieces to camera and rehashes of already-seen clips

I thought the documentary was rather overall underwhelming, which is a shame for the women speaking out

@PlanktonsComputerWife

But that article says she created a trust fund to maximise the inheritance / minimise the tax on that amount.

That's very different from creating a trust specifically to defraud your creditors

It's the same thing imo. The intention is to remove tax revenue from the populace and keep it in the family. To be expected if you're a money-grabbing corporate billionaire but not if you're in a taxpayer-funded public position.

It's not really that long since the deal was struck with the Fleet St editors to hide the stories about Edward VIII and Wallis Simpson from the British public

It’s 86 years! Literally a life time. And the world’s a much smaller place these days with technology making it impossible to repress or hide anything for long.

I think it's unfair to say the Queen should have intervened. What could she have done? Prince Andrew is an adult. She could offer her advice but he is responsible for his own decisions.

That should have been posted on the other thread!

I see all his social media accounts have now been deleted.

Yea, I saw that. Good move on their part I would say.