Time to either prosecute Andrew or forget him.

[Bougainsillier]

Firstly let me say I am in NO way defending him; hes clearly completely awful in so many ways. Finally stripped of all titles and position, and dumped over in Norfolk, but still not charged with or found guilty of any crime.

But it’s starting to feel like he’s being tried by the press now to sell stories. Isn’t there enough evidence to prosecute? Is there a cover up? Or can we just leave him to himself now? It’s news headlines endlessly…

Mandelson in the other hand is another matter..

@BemusedAmerican

What nonsense !
William was driving Andrew around at balmoral , to church for failed rehabilitation attempt etc
Not a word out of him .

His statement yesterday was such word salad it bordered on dismissive.

He ignored a brave journalist today who was only doing his job
What are you talking about ‘destabilisation’
Andrew and his family are up to their necks in this . You sound like you’d prefer it was hushed up

I agree with every word, MrsLF, except the bit about it being a different regime now. Charles has spun around to stop his letters to ministers being revealed, hidden too much about the Duchy of Cornwall's dealings, secured Prince's consent for himself when it was only supposed to apply to the monarch and even had the publicly funded report into the validity of his marriage sealed - and that's without the previous regime's hiding of matters which he could have overturned but hasn't

However I'm well aware that criticising Charles is distasteful to royalists, so doubt they'll have much to say on this

You know I'm not saying that. Unfortunately some people lap up everything the media says. Particularly the rags. Others are more careful in their views.

Of course we need the rule of law! We also need it enacted when necessary. Shame the Met didn't.

BP could make a start by withdrawing the statements they issued which smeared Virginia Guiffre and defended AMW. I won't hold my breath.

I'm happy to criticise Charles. I don't have all the facts and I'm hoping that at the end of this the system is changed for the better, whether we ultimately stay a monarchy or become a republic of some kind. I don't believe that a republic is imminent so I'm hoping that the current system gets cleaned up.

No, I have consistently said that it should not be hushed up. I am also looking forward to the live testimony of the Clintons. I just hope that there are no technical difficulties, power outages, etc. when they testify.

The real issue is that the late Queen messed up with Andrew. She should never have put him in a government position. She should never have paid the 12 million. An investigation should have been started. She wasn't acting in a vacuum. What were her advisors and government doing? Couldn't someone overrule her?

The minute I heard that Epstein was dead in that prison, my first reaction was that something funny was going on, and I'm just an American taxpayer.

I just don't see why people are venting on William. More people should be yelling at Charles and at your government.

I know, MrsLF, but then you're perfectly honest in saying you're a constitutional monarchist rather than a royalist and it's the second group i was referring to

Even as a republican I'm the first to agree a constitutional monarchy could work if there was the will to see it did. Trouble is that will appears to be entirely missing and has been for years, hence the mess we're seeing now

I followed that case and the tabloids put the man concerned on the front cover of the tabloids before he had been properly investigated!

Quite a large difference between that and members of the public and journalists shouting very legitimate questions at the RF when they appear in public! And sending e-mails to their MPs.

I think trying to equate legitimate public anger in the absence of appropriate action, not just words, from the RF, is wholly wrong.

It is really interesting to see how things have come to the surface since the late Queen died. It's as if there was a wide spread but unspoken agreement not to probe too deeply. Politicians need to get over that now, but i suspect that many of them are complicit and unwilling to have their own parts brought into the light.

I may be in the minority but Isee this as an establishment (ie political and legal power bases) problem rather than one limited to Andrew or the Royal family. It will only be fixed if all aspects are questioned and reformed.

@Puzzledandpissedoff

There is an important detail re the spider memos. Yes we know the Windsors interfere in government business and ensure that the law does not apply to them .
It took a 10 year legal case for the guardian newspaper to access the memos - the case proved that Charles was interfering in many aspects of government business - one being the regulation of ‘herbal medicine’

After the court case , the Tory government tightened the FOI legislation around the Windsors ensuring that in the future no FOI would ever apply to the monarch and heir . Secrecy was increased . And this was 10 years ago .

FOI restrictions also apply - funnily enough to Saudi Arabia! Who would have thought it. Though watching W being entertained by a man with blood on his hands there should be no surprise there. The arms industry is worth a mint.

I’m more than happy to criticise and hear criticism of Charles and the rest of the RF for things they have done and know but not about things people imagine or speculate they have done with no evidence.
i haven’t bothered posting or joining in because of the aggressive pushing of narratives that are not presented with evidence other than personal opinions.

@BemusedAmerican

Why the hell shouldn’t people question William ? They are not ‘venting’ as you put it.

A man in Scotland asked William about Andrew last week- before even the latest horrors were known - and William totally blanked him. Then William’s security approached the man and told him to stop.

William blanked a brave journalist again today .

i haven’t bothered posting or joining in because of the aggressive pushing of narratives that are not presented with evidence other than personal opinions.

Like what?
I haven't seen much of that to speak of.

There’s plenty of evidence .
Epstein was a convicted pedophile in 2008 and was freely emailing palace aides in 2019 complaining about the wording of a statement they issued for a start .

And we’d still be being lied to by the Windsors if the files hadn’t been released so I don’t know what ‘evidence’ we’d be expected to produce otherwise .

William had no problems replying when his family were accused of being racists. Yet on this occasion there was no reply.

To be fair to William, he was having a conversation with a young lady when the reporter asked him.

After the court case , the Tory government tightened the FOI legislation around the Windsors ensuring that in the future no FOI would ever apply to the monarch and heir . Secrecy was increased . And this was 10 years ago

Yes, I should have included that bit, @Ukisgaslit

In fairness I also appreciate that the government didn't have to agree, but what favours are being traded to secure what the RF want is yet another thing we don't know - though we had a glimpse of it with Fawcett flogging honours, citizenship and gifts, which naturally it was said Charles knew nothing about

William and Charles should be asked at every future public event until things start changing.

I have a lot of respect for those people brave enough to ask what the public actually wants to know.

I agree with you that it is an establishment problem. The issue is that the RF are at the top of that establishment. They have been using the political and legal systems to sweep their behaviour under the carpet, and not addressing it. The Royals have huge amounts of unearned power. It is up to Parliament and the Legal systems to ensure that they are kept in check. Instead MP's governments, the courts and the police they have colluded with to keep their secrets or in some cases have been so complicit and embroiled in them that they cannot then properly hold them to account without bringing themselves into disrepute. They shouldn't of course, have had their noses in the trough in the first place, which in turn would have forced the RF to hold their rogue members to account for fear of being found out, instead of taking the easy route of using the establishment to hide away terrible behaviour.

Actually TheignT can I add please that, having. thought about it more, I’m actually quite cross about your post!

You say we should trust the police but the Met were passed an FBI file on AMW in 2022. What have they done with it? Nothing!

What happened to the investigation about ALW using his publically funded PPO connections to dig up information on VG? Genuine question btw. I don’t know what happened.

Also, I don’t know anything about Thames Valley police but the Met have a terrible reputation when it comes to crimes against women.

There was the serving Met Officer Wayne Couzens who murdered Sarah Everard, a 33-year-old marketing executive in 2021. Couzens had exposed himself in public several times, the last time to some McDonald’s female staff while in his car, just a few days before the murder. The McDonalds staff passed his credit card details and registration number to the police. Nothing was done. Bear in mind that he had been reported twice before for similar incidents and he was still at liberty wandering around with a warrant card with which he kidnapped and murdered poor Sarah. There must have been a cover up because his nickname among his colleagues was “the rapidt” fhs! What does that say about the culture of that entire organisation? The entire case was utterly despicable.

https://news.sky.com/story/sarah-everard-murder-the-four-questions-the-police-still-need-to-answer-about-wayne-couzens-12421848

Then there is the 2020 incident when two Met officers who were supposed to be guarding the bodies of the murdered sisters in a Wembley Park overnight. The victims were Bibaa Henry, aged 46, and Nicole Smallman, aged 27. Henry, was a senior social worker, and Smallman, a photographer,

Only the Met policemen took photos of their badly injured bodies and shared them with jokes to colleagues on two WhatsApp groups. One of which contained 41 police officers. The other was named ‘Covid Cunts’.
Even worse, the family of the murder victims, unbelievably, had to fight to get the case heard and the two policemen prosecuted. What do all of those things say about the culture of the organisation?

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/dec/06/two-met-police-officers-jailed-photos-murdered-sisters-deniz-jaffer-jamie-lewis-nicole-smallman-bibaa-henry

Then there is the 2021 case of desk sergeant David Carrick described as a serial rapist and monster:
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cgkzlr25mkro

These are all relatively recent cases and sadly there are many more that are similar in nature once you start to look.

So when you say TheignT that you would rather trust in the police, especially with regard to sex crimes, rather than the public express legitimate outrage at what AMW has done, and the subsequent cover up, I think it’s actually quite offensive.

And for King Charles to be finally dragged kicking and screaming to make a statement to the effect of, “oh by the way if you want to investigate the alleged crimes of Mr Mountbatten-Windsor then you are most welcome” as if he and his staff have had nothing to do with him for the past fifteen years and long before that, is deeply offensive too.

Sorry for the essay but I am so thoroughly sick of women simply being “collateral damage” in the lives of men and supposedly “good” men not standing up and calling it out.

The truth is that King Charles and his mother, and some of their staff, covered up for his brother for years, and as KC3 in the top job now, he has to take responsibility and abdicate.

Hear hear @Readythiswayplease
And apparently there was 'nothing to see here' either in relation to AMW asking a Police Protection officer to dig dirt on VG, and giving him her social security number in order to do so. Despite there being email evidence.

That's about as well as I've ever seen it put, RainbowBagels

Clearly we're of the same mind, in that it's not a question of the RF or parliament being to blame; it's both of them, the difference being that MPs can be got rid of and the RF can't, so as things stand only one of them can be made accountable when their misdeeds are found out

When I read your posts I’m reminded of the old saying ‘you catch more flies with honey than vinegar’ and whilst there may be those amongst us who are persuaded by your posts your manner of delivering them completely leaves me cold.