Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

The royal family

The Royal Family is incredibly dysfunctional

375 replies

babsanderson · 15/01/2023 23:15

They are an incredibly dysfunctional family with lots of internal rivalries, poor parenting and a strange culture of stay silent and we will protect you from actual crimes, but speak out and we will destroy you.
They really are a mess and I suspect they are so dysfunctional, they do not realise just how messed up the family dynamics are.
But maybe such a dysfunctional family is inevitable within a hereditary monarchy where your accident of birth means you have access to more money and power than your siblings and other close relatives?

OP posts:
Onnabugeisha · 16/01/2023 20:23

Novella4 · 16/01/2023 19:09

@Onnabugeisha
Oh and re Andrew
Andrew stated clearly during his BBC interview that he was more than willing to speak to the FBI , wanted to do so in fact . Pledged was the word he used I think

Well , it's just that 350 million 'royal' dysfunctional family having a little laugh at our expense (literally ) isn't it ?
How many days has it been ? 1000? 1200? Still waiting for him to honour his pledge to help the FBI

What are you on about? The FBI have had an open invitation to meet with Prince Andrew in London for over three years. He was advised to meet with them there by legal counsel. The FBI aren’t waiting on Prince Andrew, it’s the other way round.

Onnabugeisha · 16/01/2023 20:26

Novella4 · 16/01/2023 19:03

@Blossomtoes
Well only you can speak for your family but none of that occurs in mine thank you very much ! A parking ticket is the worst of it - how very dull of us !

And you completely miss the point - your unfaithful , time serving relatives ( as you state ) aren't taking hundred of millions a year from the population to live a life of luxury and head of state
This ' we all all as dysfunctional as the royals ' line is untrue and self defeating

The RF aren’t taking any money from ‘the population’ 😟
And no one as said we are all as dysfunctional as the RF, simply that they’re not unusually dysfunctional.

Onnabugeisha · 16/01/2023 20:33

Novella4 · 16/01/2023 18:59

@Onnabugeisha
No you are misinformed

Ball had accepted a caution which means he accepted guilt.
I think Charles claimed not to know or not to understand what a caution was ...
He gave Ball a house on land he ( Charles) owned after this

A caution can only be used when a person admits guilt for a minor crime.
Zero sex offences are minor crimes.
Therefore, the caution did not make Ball a “convicted sex offender.”

He did “give” Ball a house, he leased him a house. As in he was Ball’s landlord. Ball paid him rent.

babsanderson · 16/01/2023 20:33

@Onnabugeisha I know Andrew SAID that. But he has always refused to actually meet with them. The FBI appealed to the British government for their help so they could meet with him, and were rebuffed.

OP posts:
babsanderson · 16/01/2023 20:34

Onnabugeisha · 16/01/2023 20:33

A caution can only be used when a person admits guilt for a minor crime.
Zero sex offences are minor crimes.
Therefore, the caution did not make Ball a “convicted sex offender.”

He did “give” Ball a house, he leased him a house. As in he was Ball’s landlord. Ball paid him rent.

Except it was a sexual crime against children. He should never have legally been offered a caution.

OP posts:
Coxspurplepippin · 16/01/2023 21:07

I'm so over 'dysfunctional'. Charles appears to love his sons very much. There's plenty of photographic evidence of him hugging his children. Even Harry, in his ridiculous book, admits his father is a kind, loving man. William and Kate appear to love their children, their kids look happy in their relationships with each other and with their parents. Sophie and Edward's children seem like well adjusted kids, close to their parents. Mike and Zara Tindall and their kids seem like a happy unit. Zara obviously has a very close relationship with her mum. Beatrice and Eugenie love their parents.

No-one's family is perfect but very few families are 'dysfunctional' to the extent that people are claiming on this thread

Onnabugeisha · 16/01/2023 23:04

babsanderson · 16/01/2023 20:34

Except it was a sexual crime against children. He should never have legally been offered a caution.

There you go, another defamatory error in fact.

The police caution was regarding a 19yr old man. No children were involved.

“Ball resigned from his position as Bishop of Gloucester in 1993 after admitting to an act of gross indecency with a 19-year-old man and accepting a formal police caution for it.”
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Ball_(bishop)

”gross indecency” included laws the criminalised sexual behaviour between men.

”A sexual act that is more than ordinary *indecency but falls short of actual intercourse. It may include masturbation and indecent physical contact, or even indecent behaviour without any physical contact. It is an offence for a man to commit an act of gross indecency with another man unless both parties are over 18, consent to the act, and it is carried out in private.”
lawi.org.uk/gross-indecency/

I don’t know exactly what Peter Ball did, but will find out if you post any more malarky.

Onnabugeisha · 16/01/2023 23:07

babsanderson · 16/01/2023 20:33

@Onnabugeisha I know Andrew SAID that. But he has always refused to actually meet with them. The FBI appealed to the British government for their help so they could meet with him, and were rebuffed.

He hasn’t refused to meet with the FBI. The FBI refuse to come to London to meet with him.

Novella4 · 17/01/2023 09:37

@Onnabugeisha

Educate yourself

amp.theguardian.com/world/2020/jan/14/friendship-with-prince-charles-made-paedophile-bishop-peter-ball-impregnable

The sheer desperation you display in deflecting and excusing actions by the royals .
And as for the 'royals dont take money fro the people '!!
I assume fairies provide security transport sovereign grant - 350 million a year and rising

babsanderson · 17/01/2023 09:44

"Prince Andrew has provided “zero” cooperation with the Jeffrey Epstein sex trafficking inquiry, US prosecutors said on Monday, despite earlier promises to help investigations in any way possible.
Speaking outside Epstein’s Manhattan mansion, Geoffrey Berman, US attorney for the southern district of New York, said the agencies had contacted Andrew regarding an interview, but that he had not yet agreed to provide one."

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/jan/27/prince-andrew-jeffrey-epstein-us-prosecutors-fbi-seek-interview

OP posts:
babsanderson · 17/01/2023 09:46

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/prince-andrew-refused-to-speak-to-us-about-epstein-says-fbi-k6zvdhbb6

"A lawyer representing Jeffrey Epstein’s alleged victims has called it “outrageous” that Prince Andrew has still not cooperated with US authorities, one year after he promised to do so, calling on him to “do the right thing"."

www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/jeffrey-epstein-prince-andrew-ghislaine-maxwell-b1758934.html

OP posts:
babsanderson · 17/01/2023 09:47

"Two months ago, Britain’s Prince Andrew issued a public statement saying he would be willing to help American law enforcement officials with their investigation into allegations of sex-trafficking by Jeffrey Epstein and his associates.
F.B.I. agents and federal prosecutors in New York took him at his word. They reached out to his lawyers and asked to interview him.
There was no response at all, according to three people familiar with the investigation.
On Monday, in a rare move, the United States attorney in Manhattan publicly called out the prince for breaking his commitment."

www.nytimes.com/2020/01/27/nyregion/jeffrey-epstein-prince-andrew.html

OP posts:
babsanderson · 17/01/2023 09:47

"The Duke of York has provided "zero co-operation" to an inquiry into late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, the prosecutor in charge of the investigation has said.
Prosecutors and the FBI have contacted his lawyers but have received no reply, said US attorney Geoffrey Berman."

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51271871

OP posts:
Novella4 · 17/01/2023 09:48

And the point re Ball wasn't that one individual , that could easily be bad luck
It's that Charles has a brother ( no doubt you are an apologist for Andrew too) an uncle ( court case in Belfast ) and friends all linked with sex crimes and pedophiles

Onnabugeisha · 17/01/2023 09:49

Novella4 · 17/01/2023 09:37

@Onnabugeisha

Educate yourself

amp.theguardian.com/world/2020/jan/14/friendship-with-prince-charles-made-paedophile-bishop-peter-ball-impregnable

The sheer desperation you display in deflecting and excusing actions by the royals .
And as for the 'royals dont take money fro the people '!!
I assume fairies provide security transport sovereign grant - 350 million a year and rising

Educate yourself

The friendship didn’t make him ‘impregnable-‘ because the first time Ball was accused of child sexual abuse, it was investigated, he was charged, and then he was convicted to prison. Your desperation to try and convince everyone that a bishops landlord was his BFF and interfered with the police is ridiculous.

Excuse what actions exactly? Hmm? So landlords can’t lease properties to anyone cautioned for gross indecency with another adult? Where do you think all the convicts who have actually done crime and been released from prison live then?

And educate yourself on the sovereign grant too as the source of the funds is not “from the people”.

babsanderson · 17/01/2023 09:52

"The first police investigation into Ball, who died in June at the age of 87, was launched in 1992 when a monk training under him in Gloucester accused the cleric of several lewd acts including watching him shower, embracing him naked, and threatening to beat him. He said the indecent behavior started when he was 17."

www.insider.com/prince-charles-history-with-pedophile-priest-peter-ball-2020-1

17 - he was a child, not 19 as you claim @Onnabugeisha

Why are you so eager to continually lie to defend Charles and Andrew?

OP posts:
babsanderson · 17/01/2023 09:54

@Onnabugeisha Why are you twisting what happened? Charles was not Peter Ball's landlord, he was his friend and has said this in writing. He helped him in a number of ways as a friend.

OP posts:
Onnabugeisha · 17/01/2023 09:56

Novella4 · 17/01/2023 09:48

And the point re Ball wasn't that one individual , that could easily be bad luck
It's that Charles has a brother ( no doubt you are an apologist for Andrew too) an uncle ( court case in Belfast ) and friends all linked with sex crimes and pedophiles

It’s not being an apologist to keep to the fucking facts. Its laughable really how smug you are about your morally superior family…only parking tickets you said! What do you know about bad luck? It seems you and your family live a charmed life.

Ivd already posted the facts about Mountbatten and Andrew and think you’re an idiot to hold King Charles III responsible for his relatives. The same with the acquaintances brought up- as have other posters who are not desperate to smear and defame someone for guilt by association prior to arrest and conviction for crimes.

babsanderson · 17/01/2023 09:59

@Onnabugeisha But you do not post facts. You say Peter Balls caution was for a 19 year old man when it was for legally a child.

OP posts:
babsanderson · 17/01/2023 10:00

@Onnabugeisha You claim that Andrew was happy to talk to the FBI even though there are a ton of articles, some of which I have posted, saying the FBI kept trying to talk to him and they and his lawyers ignored the FBI trying to arrange a meeting with him.

OP posts:
Onnabugeisha · 17/01/2023 10:01

babsanderson · 17/01/2023 09:54

@Onnabugeisha Why are you twisting what happened? Charles was not Peter Ball's landlord, he was his friend and has said this in writing. He helped him in a number of ways as a friend.

He was his friend until he found out, along with everyone else, what Ball was truly like.

Dont you lecture me about “twisting things.”

He was his landlord, but you LIED and said he had bought and “given” a house to Ball. You also LIED and said the police caution was due to a “sexual crime involving children” when it was a caution for gross indecency with an adult man. You LIED and posted links referring to letters he had written Ball saying they were from after he’d been convicted as a sex offender, when they were actually from a DECADE prior to him even being arrested, much less convicted.

Onnabugeisha · 17/01/2023 10:03

babsanderson · 17/01/2023 09:59

@Onnabugeisha But you do not post facts. You say Peter Balls caution was for a 19 year old man when it was for legally a child.

So Wikipedia and the BBC sources I posted reporting that the police caution was regarding an act of gross indecency with a 19yr old man are wrong? We are just supposed to believe it was for a child based on your word alone? Pathetic

babsanderson · 17/01/2023 10:17

@Onnabugeisha I posted links to news articles saying he was 17 years old when the assaults happened. He may have been 19 when Peter Ball was actually charged. And yes I believe multiple news articles over wikipedia.

OP posts:
Novella4 · 17/01/2023 10:17

@Onnabugeisha
Ok I'll spell it out for you .
Sovereign grant is money that could go to the people but is diverted to the the royals . So it's still taken
The costs of transport and security are kept secret .

People will draw their own conclusions as out a family with generations of sex offenders in their ranks - facts which have only come to light due to individuals refusing to bow and scrape

babsanderson · 17/01/2023 10:18

@Onnabugeisha I posted quotes from news articles and the links. There is clear evidence of what I said.

OP posts:
Swipe left for the next trending thread