King Charles to pay for Duke of York’s private security

[tatalan]

Monarch expected to foot £3m bill for guards.

<a class="break-all" href="https://archive.ph/2022.12.19-193449/www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2022/12/19/king-charles-pay-duke-yorks-private-security-refusing-do-prince/#selection-1193.1-1193.56" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">King Charles to pay for Duke of York’s private security

Fascinating. What do we think?

No. If his brother or brothers in fact, can't speak out why should his nephew?

He has two brothers and a sister. They are silent. They protect him and have done for decades.
Don't put this on his nephew, Harry. Criticise Zara, Peter, Louise too then. They're in the same position, their uncle. Why should the couple who are hounded by the press speak out and get annihilated but other nieces and nephews shouldn't?.

I'm not excusing any of them. So why are you (again) excusing M&H?

Andrew did not choose to be born Royal.It is being Royal that put him at risk, so it seems fair.

I would agree if he was not a sexual predator who got off because he is a member of the Royal family.

What has he got off with? As far as I'm aware no one has been charged with sexual offences against trafficked girls? So how has Andrew being royal got him off anything?

Andrew refused to be questioned. The US police appealed to the British government for help and were not given any help. So the police had to drop the matter. If they could not interview Andrew they were not going to get anywhere. That only happened because he is a royal.
So yes he get off with it. Did not get past the first hurdle.

Wow. I think that if I was Harry I would be writing a sequel to my memoir called "My Dad is a Fucking Dick". How hugely unpleasant.

The American Justice dept wanted to interview him in person and he declined. Too bloody right he did. He was a person of interest. I wouldn't do a voluntary interview with the police in this country for something that could end up with me in court. Even less so for a foreign govt. Are you so naive as to think that any of these policing bodies are on your side. You only have to read what happened to Monica Lewinski to know that cooperation is not your best course of action.
And in top if that, you're running up legal fees.

PA offered to do written replies to submitted questions. The US Justice Dept declined that.

The FBI has followed up a number of complainants to see if they can make a case against PA. If they could, they'd extradite him. So far the American Attorney General has declined to do that. But, then, so far, they haven't indicted anyone. It's not PA's royal status that stops him from being indicted and extradited, it's the fact that so far the FBI have indicted anyone.

If you ever receive a letter from the US govt asking you to do a voluntary interview, I'd suggest declining it. That's your right and you don't have to be royal to exert it.

He hasn't got off with anything. At this point the FBI don't have a case against him.

Excusing them of what? Not speaking out? I have already explained in my post which you obviously haven't read.
But I will repeat... they get annihilated in the media for opening their mouths on anything, so why should a couple who don't live here, who put up with this continual negative media campaign be the ones that have to speak out where there are others who could... much closer to PA (in proximity and relationship) and who have actually enabled him for decades... appallingly don't speak out. I hope that clarifies my position for you.

Anyway peace and love and let's leave the couple alone for a day maybe...
Happy Christmas, have a great day

Merry Christmas to everyone who celebrates!

How has Andrew being royal got him off anything?

Same reason as Burrell and Meghan were kept from having to enter a witness box, Marsha - the idea of any of them being subject to a professional cross examination is unthinkable for the RF

Happy Christmas, have a great da

Andrew did not even get interviewed by the US police. He just refused and the government refused to make him co-operate.

"If you ever receive a letter from the US govt asking you to do a voluntary interview, I'd suggest declining it. That's your right and you don't have to be royal to exert it."

The US police asked for the UK governments help in securing an interview with Andrew. They refused to do anything.

For ordinary UK citizens the US police can ask you to give a voluntary interview, but if you refuse they can go to the courts who can compel you to submit to an interview, they can extradite you to face trial. None of that was going to happen to Andrew.

I suppose the difference is Andrew would have continued being a working royal if he could have. He wasn’t given a choice. Harry and Meghan opted out of being working royals.

Just as the US Government refused to assist the U.K. Government with the Anne Sicoolas case .

@BethJ62 You are ignoring that she was prosecuted and found guilty.

The case against Andrew could go no further. The police were not even allowed to talk to him.

@antelopevalley . Eventually. After she and the US authorities dragged their heels and placed obstacles in the way of proceedings .

The FBI haven't indicted anyone in the US. Why would they indict someone abroad before going after a US citizen?
What you're saying is that they're not indicting anyone in the US but they want to indict A but they're refraining from doing so because the monarch wouldn't like it.
It doesn't make sense.

There is a step before this. They wanted to interview him. He refused. They appealed to the UK government to get him to co-operate with an interview, the government refused. There was nothing else they could do. If they can't even interview him any case was going nowhere.

The FBI did not want to interview Andrew as an offender. They wanted to interview him as a witness. A witness can be compelled to give evidence in court but there is no court case to which to summons Andrew. The UK police cannot compel anyone to give a written witness statement. You have a complete right not to answer any questions. That goes for any uk citizen.

The USA can extradite offenders from the UK. They cannot extradite witnesses. The FBI were not questioning Andrew as an offender, they were questioning him as a witness. Ergo, he does not have to give a witness statement and he can't be extradited. Nothing to do with being a royal.

No one has to cooperate in their own prosecution. 🙄 If the FBI had evidence against PA, they can go to court in the US and request his extradition. So far they don't have evidence to prosecute him. and PA does not have to give them it.

BUT the FBI were not looking at prosecuting Andrew hence he cannot be compelled by the UK police to give a witness statement.

From ABC news...
Definitely the department wants to talk to Prince Andrew, that's why the Southern District has been making efforts to communicate and to arrange an interview with him," Barr said. "The department is communicating with him and made it clear that we'd like to interview him."

Federal prosecutors in New York have formally requested testimony from Prince Andrew as part of its criminal investigation into the alleged co-conspirators of Epstein, two officials familiar with the matter told ABC News last month. Prince Andrew is being sought as a witness and is not the target of the investigation, ABC News previously reported.

He can't be forced to give evidence. Even if the govt compelled him to court, and that's very unlikely they could do that, he still doesn’t have to give evidence. Are you seriously suggesting that an accused has to make a case for the prosecution because they don't have evidence to make the case themselves?

Asked if they had received an MLA (Mutual Legal Assistance) request for Prince Andrew, the Home Office would only say: “As a matter of long-standing policy and practice, we neither confirm nor deny the existence of mutual legal assistance requests.”

If an MLA request is granted, Prince Andrew could be asked to give evidence in the UK.

Usually that testimony would not be under oath.

However, if he were to refuse to co-operate, the Home Office guidance says “it may be possible to compel the individual to attend court. However, the witness can exercise the right against self-incrimination and refuse to answer any questions at court.”

We know people can say no comment.

Exactly. He could have done that and no commented call the way through. The problem with that strategy from thecuS point if view is that by asking thecqyestions, they'd reveal to PA'S lawyers what exactly they knew. The FBI would notvwant to do that. Which is why they've onto compel him. They want him to cooperate.

PA on the other hand has offered several times to cooperate but he wants to give written answers to their questions. That way his lawyers have the ability to frame his responses in a way that won't self-incriminate. But the FBI don't want that. They'd like him to self-incriminate. And also they can't ask follow up questions to see where that would take them.

There is no upside for PA to answer questions in a face to face interview with interrogation experts from the FBI. I don't believe there are any British lawyers who would advise their clients to participate in that scenario, knowing that any evidence the FBI gleaned could then be used against them.