Do you think Andrew will face any criminal charges?

[LotsInCommon]

I’m only now reading Virginias book and it’s a very difficult read.

It’s 7 months on from Andrews arrest for misconduct in public office. Do you think he will be charged with anything to do with that? Do you think he’ll be charged with sexual abuse and rape?

Is there a police force in the UK that's not dodgy?

We don't know if the judge made a mistake or if they intended to do this.

@Serenster if the judge thought they were allowing special materials to be collected, then it will simply be a technicality and the search will be legal. So it depends

Hugely disappointing yet massively unsurprising at the same time.

I do wonder though whether anything of actual value to the enquiry was seized given Andrew was reportedly slapping the RL shredder hard last Christmas and the general royal penchant for the terminal 'editing' of sensitive documents.

Thank you prh47bridge

This is very helpful.

Thanks again, @prh47bridge. I really appreciate you spending the time on here explaining this from a professional standpoint.

If any of you non legals, have done jury service and been asked to leave the court room, matters of law and technicalities are decided on. This is not unusual. Embarrassing in this particular instance, but not uncommon.

Sorry for the length of this post but the media response to the hearing has been interesting.

Can’t link it but I watched a podcast produced by The Times, called The Royals podcast last night, which featured the Times’s legal correspondent.

It was broadcast before the results of the hearing became known, but they added a statement of what happened at the end. At least I think they did, as I was nodding off at that point.

They touched on the PR aspects that pps have mentioned; how it’s been eight months since the arrest, and how the King wanted; publicly anyway, the investigation to take its course while AMW was “contained” at Sandringham. Apparently “contained’ was the word that BP used to brief journalists back when AMW moved locations. And how this challenge by AMW is very much in opposition to all of that, as he is not laying low, and the reporting on this is filling the airwaves instead of reports on KC’s activities and what the rest of the RF are doing.

(We know from Lownie of course that BP, while publicly supporting the investigation, have allegedly been busy sending out legal letters leaning on former staff and PPOs to ensure their silence. Lownie said he has had eyes on one such letter.)

But in terms of AMW’s PR, they thought this is quite an interesting preemptive strike, perhaps made to convince the public that it was all a fishing exercise. But overall in terms of the legal issues that AMW is facing, I think the Times legal correspondent thought it was a technical blip. Mind you, he also said he would be surprised if the legal review was upheld.

It was certainly a bold move to challenge an Old Bailey judge. According to the excellent Joshua Rosenberg on LBC, warrants are usually issued by a magistrate, so maybe that’s where it went wrong?

I also watched, for my sins, a bit of The Mail’s equivalent podcast featuring the truly gruesome Richard Eden.

It emerged in these conversations that the King is supporting AMW with a sum thought to be around £1 million annually which pays for accommodation and staff, not sure about security, that AMW has bounced back from his apparently fragile state and although he has lost his gun licence, he enjoys playing a social part in shooting weekends and the company of a tight circle of aristocratic friends in Norfolk, who are entertaining him with what they assumed was a tacit nod from Charles. Mind you, they also say that KC hasn’t seen AMW since his arrest.

It’s interesting about the money isn’t it? Apparently these judicial reviews are not mega expensive to fund, relatively speaking. But if AMW needed help paying off VG, where is his legal fund money coming from?

Interestingly it was the TVP who wanted the hearing in private not AMW. And AMW’s defensive strike was launched back in Feb.

One of his legal team is Gary Bloxham aka “good news Gary” apparently, who was described as a very experienced white collar and “blood and guts” criminal lawyer. I can’t imagine that he comes cheaply?

The Times journalist also said that it’s the first time a member of the RF has challenged criminal proceedings since King Charles 1st in 1649.

And that didn’t exactly go well 😬

And then I watched a snippet from the News Agents with Emily Maitlis and Jon Sopel, the first of whom was just back from USA researching a documentary. EM’s strong impression is that the Epstein story is still very much live in the USA and still very much live in relation to AMW, so that is optimistic news at least.

And lastly Joshua Rosenberg on LBC ended on a positive note echoing pps saying that the police didn’t have to hand back the evidence because it was possible that the grounds still stood for them to be gathered if the correct warrant had been used, and that this will be decided next year.

“The judge said Thames Valley Police are continuing with their investigations and the proceedings to deal with this problem that has arisen are ongoing and will be heard in private."

"The law allows the police to hang on to this material until that question is resolved, on the basis, as the judge explained, there wouldn't be much point in the police handing it back and then applying for a new warrant and being granted and having to go and seize it again."

So not losing hope entirely.

You would have thought they would have been sure to check that all T's were crossed and I's dotted before carrying out the raid !
Its ludicrous.
How much of our money is being spent on this farce ?

I thought Andrew didn't actually lose his gun licence? From memory I think he could only use a gun under close supervision, which would still allow shooting parties.

Yes magistrates normally issue warrants, But old bailey judges issue warrants in serious crimes, involving high profile people or complex cases.

You may well be right Constantrunner

I’m repeating what I heard on one of the podcasts and haven’t verified it myself.

Found a link:

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c5yde5p9kw9o

You are right Constantrunner

He voluntarily surrendered his licence but if you read on, he can still use his gun under supervision. The devil is in the detail as ever.

Another detail :

In 2020 Buckingham palace was handed 33000 emails related to Andrew’s time as ‘trade envoy’. ( I previously thought the number was 30 000 but I heard I think Lownie say 33 000 recently )

Where are they now ? What was done with them ? Were they given to authorities if irregularities were claimed or suspected ?

When Andrew was moved from royal lodge in the dead of night was the lodge left untouched to allow police to search for evidence?

This is wider than just Andrew .

I’ve just heard a podcast re security risks and Andrew .
And some posters try to say that republican posters here asking legitimate questions are somehow a threat to the UK . It’s the Windsors and their associates who represent a threat.

Oh Andrew has been on shooting jollies and other visits to estates including Anne’s and Edward’s according to Lownie .

The so called ‘isolation’ fending for himself is a pantomime to fool the stupid .
We saw him laughing with William at a funeral . They are all hoping they can drag it out and that the stupid public will forget all about it .
They are wrong .

These are all such important points.

Forgive me if I posted this link before:

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy02j5pl98no

More interesting details about the original source of the e-mails.

I get the sense that the article is worded rather carefully and there have been significant details missed out too?

TVP not commenting on whether they have been looking at the emails or not?

It is indeed all very murky.

Let’s hope the careful wording is because the emails ARE being looked at .

I’d still like to know how our unelected head of state / head of judiciary responded when they were handed the emails 6 years ago .

Where are (the 33,000 emails) now ? What was done with them ? Were they given to authorities if irregularities were claimed or suspected?

Given to authorities? You must be joking, @Ukisgaslit; is it really likely the palace would hand over potentially incriminating items to anyone not immediately under their control?

If the emails still exist at all - which would surprise me - they'll probably join the rest in being sealed

But if AMW needed help paying off VG, where is his legal fund money coming from?

For what it is worth, it appears that the settlement with VG was much lower than originally suggested by the press and still widely believed. Those close to the case say they understand the settlement was between £3 million and £5 million.

Re gun licences, you do not need a licence to borrow and use a shotgun on private land in the presence of the owner provided you comply with certain rules. So Andrew giving up his firearms and shotgun certificate does not stop him going shooting, but it limits what he can do.

Interesting about the gun laws thank you!

What is your source for the pay-off sum please? (Genuinely interested, not asking in an interrogatory way.)

Prince Andrew can still use his gun licence under strict supervision. That isn't just on private land. So he can still take part in shooting parties as long as someone agrees they will supervise him. He can't go out shooting alone in public land.

I think the settlement with Virginia being much lower is a claim based on a technicality. The majority of the £12 million went to a victims rights charity as part of the settlement. So the actual amount that went to Virginia was much lower. But the overall amount is still correct.

£7 million from Elizabeth, £3 million from Philip and the rest from Charles.

No, this is about the total settlement, not some technicality.

The £12 million figure reported by the Telegraph was a guess. American lawyers I talk to always thought this was far too high, especially given other settlements in similar cases and the fact there was no permanent gagging order. The Sun on Sunday reported the lower figure after talking to insider sources. This is far more in line with settlements paid in other similar cases.

No. It’ll drag on forever with nothing getting done.

If they are within the Palace, presumably they will be within the large tranche of documents being reviewed by the police as reported back in February.

The question is, when they were sent to the Palace originally, were they simply forwarded on to AMW's office, as they had his name on them so were presumed to be his business, or did anyone else look at them?

@bluegreygreen

All reports state that the emails were received by the ‘lord chamberlain’ ie head of royal household .
Not sent to Andrew .