AMW continuing his effort to end the Monarchy part 5

[simpsonthecat]

This will carry on... so new thread !

Link to old one below

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/the_royal_family/5527311-amw-continuing-his-effort-to-end-the-monarchy-part-4?page=20&reply=153382872

Just despicable

I see it is not about the main investigation but about Thames Valley's warrants to search Sandringham and other properties. I hope that this comes under Andrew's extreme entitlement and is a misjudgement on his part.

Thanks @HoldMyWine.

I wonder what his legal challenge to the warrants is?

I hope, for everyone's sake, that no-one made any error with them.

Legal challenges to processes are made but I’d imagine his arrest, was sanctioned quite high up. I’d be surprised if a mistake was made.

Thanks for links.

Unsurprising the 'Turnip Toffs' are taking their cue from the royals 🙄

Also unsurprising the shameless one is challenging legal action taken against him.

I'm guessing he considers the warrants somehow a weak area and thinks if he can win this challenge he will have grounds to bleat about the charges against him being trumped up 🙄

Taken from the article -
A private High Court hearing is expected to be held on Thursday to determine whether to release court documents relating to the judicial review.

Is this him saying "I'm not going anywhere" because any court documents will be poured over and dissected.
He is the most disgusting entitled man. Somewhere along the line someone is paying for this legal challenge, will it be him I wonder. As usual, it's the Charles not involved thing.

I don't know what his legal case is? The way the search was carried out or the fact he thinks he's innocent. Given what he was passing on to his buddy JE and others, I doubt the latter.

Does anyone know on what grounds he is seeking a judicial review?

I wonder who is funding him. I'm guessing someone in the Middle East or China. He is really is the most entitled arrogant person.

The whole process is going to be so long - especially because of the 80,000 backlog in the courts. This article is informed and concise (before this latest move by AMW)

Analysis: Why the case against Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor is so complex | UCL News

https://apple.news/Aqrisi7XKRVu5qZj2kP6YNg

Unsurprising the 'Turnip Toffs' are taking their cue from the royals 🙄

Bound to, @CathyorClaire, and when it all goes wrong there's always "they didn't know" to trot out

Like others I hope to god the arrangements really were watertight, but otherwise the news is no surprise at all - and so much for suggestions the family have finally brought him under control

In other words, a total nightmare. This will be strung out for years and years.

Well, for as long as Charles lives anyway, simpsonthecat

Hardly anything has gone right for him since the Queen died and I doubt he'd welcome even more disclosures, but when the time comes William will no doubt present himself as a clean slate and hopefully have the nous to shut down the dirt properly

The judicial review of the warrants seems to be a fairly routine defence tactic which others have used. My understanding is that if the warrant is incorrect any evidence gathered using the warrant cannot subsequently be used in court to prosecute AMW.

My thoughts are the legal arguments will be highly technical.

The smoke and mirrors around what KC, the Crown Estates etc. “own”, including what is private and what is the Crowns etc. could help AMW by blurring who owns the properties to be searched. This could lead to a “technical error” in drafting the warrant.

My favourite bits in the small amounts of criminal cases I did, was when the juries were sent out, as to me, that was when the most interesting and challenging technicalities, were discussed. When I did jury service, I was most put out whenever I had to leave the courtroom 😁

I agree. As others have said this looks like a "technicality thing" - For the love of God could he just not realise thus far he's got off quite lightly ( and I'll just say he has not been convicted of anything , but he hasn't put himself out to cooperate with investigations ) . So innocent until proven guilty - Of Course. But having told Emily he is innocent and would help in any investigation - don't see that has happened .

I normally like to take a measured approach to my posts. But in this instance I will say I hope the CPS say "Behold my field of fucks , for it is barren " Obviously that would have to be translated into proper legal language, I'm just giving them a start - always harder to start from a blank page 😎

@MrsLeonFarrell I wonder who is funding him.

Yes, so do I. Doesn't AMW already owe millions to C3, the estates of his father, and his mother? I wonder if the funding has to remain secret?

Funding is normally confidential.

I know it’s a civil not criminal case but there is a lot of speculation about the funding of Sandie Peggie’s cases, to the point one respondents barrister asked her under oath.

The smoke and mirrors around what KC, the Crown Estates etc. “own”, including what is private and what is the Crowns etc. could help AMW by blurring who owns the properties to be searched. This could lead to a “technical error” in drafting the warrant

The thought had occurred to me, @Kirschcherries, and since they apparently need the monarch's permission to enter property they own I'd expect there to be some opportunities right there ... possibly involving yet another "Charles didn't know ..."

Anyone who could answer this please do.

I believe AMW cannot be subpoenaed to give evidence in the US ( in person). However , if he were to agree to give evidence over video would that give him some protection. Can he be subpoenaed to give video evidence. I'm asking because I'd like to know the rules. I think if AMW is as innocent as he says he is he should shoot over to the US and give evidence. As should SF. I'm trying to work out why he wouldn't give video evidence from the UK .

Thanks anyone who knows about this.

To be fair I think the technicalities maybe so obscure no one realised until AMWs legal advice did detailed research.

It's an interesting thought, @Kirschcherries and @Puzzledandpissedoff.

There were 2 statements made in February 2026, one before AMW's arrest and one immediately afterwards (on the same day). The first was from Buckingham Palace, the second a personal one from the King.
Both expressed clear support for the police. I had assumed that would include allowing access to police for any purpose. He certainly gave them permission to access records at Buckingham Palace. https://archive.is/CchRe

My assumption would be that the Senior Officers would ask permission of the King, but would also seek warrants from a judge to cover for any uncertainties.

I'm copying the text of each statement here (as much for me being able to find them again as for others to see).

09/02/26
The King has made clear, in words and through unprecedented actions, his profound concern at allegations which continue to come to light in respect of Mr Mountbatten-Windsor’s conduct.

While the specific claims in question are for Mr Mountbatten-Windsor to address, if we are approached by Thames Valley Police we stand ready to support them as you would expect.

As was previously stated, Their Majesties’ thoughts and sympathies have been, and remain with, the victims of any and all forms of abuse.

19/02/26
I have learned with the deepest concern the news about Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor and suspicion of misconduct in public office. What now follows is the full, fair and proper process by which this issue is investigated in the appropriate manner and by the appropriate authorities. In this, as I have said before, they have our full and wholehearted support and co-operation.

Let me state clearly: the law must take its course.

As this process continues, it would not be right for me to comment further on this matter. Meanwhile, my family and I will continue in our duty and service to you all.

Charles R.

I’m no expert but surely as that comes from the king would that not count as permission and therefore how could the warrants be questioned?
unless I’m missing something obvious.

@Kirschcherries will know more than I do, but it may relate to whether the King can give permission for a search of a Crown Estate property, if there is any technical problem with the search warrant.

He owns Sandringham, so there shouldn't be any problem there. The issue is likely to be Royal Lodge.

The Crown Estate is held by the Sovereign 'in right of the Crown', but is an independent commercial business, run by a Board of Commissioners under The Crown Estate Act 2025.

Thanks blue! , I had a feeling that it would be more complicated than I thought!

IANAL but I have over the years read about cases where evidence was disregarded because the warrant was incorrectly drafted.

It’s not in doubt KC gave permission.

What I am suggesting is that this will be really technical points about what was actually written on the warrant and was it 100% accurate. I don’t know enough to say what, but a good example could be who owns the properties being searched and on what basis AMW occupies them. If they get it wrong it might invalidate the warrant.