FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to The Lounge

Prince Andrew

Jump to newest
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

Mummy is not happy. Does this mean he's confessed? If they thought he was innocent the would surely strand by him so to be cut off like this implies they know he's not?

Not like me to speculate I know but I'm intrigued.

Mr

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ed-monkeyCouple
over a year ago

Hailsham

I think it's more a matter that by having the civil case being approved to go to court he has brought the family name into disrepute

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *yron69Man
over a year ago

Fareham

Isn’t the Tower there for his sort?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Does that make him less than Harry now?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ucka39Man
over a year ago

Newcastle


"Mummy is not happy. Does this mean he's confessed? If they thought he was innocent the would surely strand by him so to be cut off like this implies they know he's not?

Not like me to speculate I know but I'm intrigued.

Mr"

It's because it looks embarrassing whilst something is being pursued and wouldn't be fit for purpose if he's found not guilty yes if we no that's impossible but if he was he'd get his royal status back but might end up with another attachment a prison number

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *orkieBiFemWoman
over a year ago

Barnsley

Yes I think he’s slipped down the slippery slope there. Even Harry is doing better than paedophile Andrew right now. Interesting times!

I think it’s more about the crown saving face. His actions or associations to the case could reduce the popularity of the monarchy. I think we should go for a republic anyway. Parasites the lot of them!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

You only take the sweets off the naughty children

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ucka39Man
over a year ago

Newcastle


"You only take the sweets off the naughty children"

I'm sure big Bob is waiting for him

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ategoodbyeMan
over a year ago

Hertfordshire


"Yes I think he’s slipped down the slippery slope there. Even Harry is doing better than paedophile Andrew right now. Interesting times!

I think it’s more about the crown saving face. His actions or associations to the case could reduce the popularity of the monarchy. I think we should go for a republic anyway. Parasites the lot of them!"

I have no love for the Royals and I’d be perfectly happy with a Republic. But I wouldn’t call somebody a paedophile for having sex with a 17 year old. Creepy, yes, but not that. Unless there’s something I don’t know.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nabelle21Woman
over a year ago

B38

I feel sorry for mummy...she has never put a foot wrong. Worked hard...(differently to us but still..and she has himmfor a son!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *yron69Man
over a year ago

Fareham

What past Prince never had a dabble with a maiden or two? Not defending anyone but royals always satisfied their lust.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ora the explorerWoman
over a year ago

Paradise, Herts


"Yes I think he’s slipped down the slippery slope there. Even Harry is doing better than paedophile Andrew right now. Interesting times!

I think it’s more about the crown saving face. His actions or associations to the case could reduce the popularity of the monarchy. I think we should go for a republic anyway. Parasites the lot of them!

I have no love for the Royals and I’d be perfectly happy with a Republic. But I wouldn’t call somebody a paedophile for having sex with a 17 year old. Creepy, yes, but not that. Unless there’s something I don’t know."

I do think it’s totally different. A 17 year old and an actual child. Even though it’s still a crime it’s not the same. But in the laws eyes it is.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nabelle21Woman
over a year ago

B38


"Yes I think he’s slipped down the slippery slope there. Even Harry is doing better than paedophile Andrew right now. Interesting times!

I think it’s more about the crown saving face. His actions or associations to the case could reduce the popularity of the monarchy. I think we should go for a republic anyway. Parasites the lot of them!

I have no love for the Royals and I’d be perfectly happy with a Republic. But I wouldn’t call somebody a paedophile for having sex with a 17 year old. Creepy, yes, but not that. Unless there’s something I don’t know.

I do think it’s totally different. A 17 year old and an actual child. Even though it’s still a crime it’s not the same. But in the laws eyes it is. "

I do too

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Yes I think he’s slipped down the slippery slope there. Even Harry is doing better than paedophile Andrew right now. Interesting times!

I think it’s more about the crown saving face. His actions or associations to the case could reduce the popularity of the monarchy. I think we should go for a republic anyway. Parasites the lot of them!

I have no love for the Royals and I’d be perfectly happy with a Republic. But I wouldn’t call somebody a paedophile for having sex with a 17 year old. Creepy, yes, but not that. Unless there’s something I don’t know."

I think its more that she says it was against her will.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *aliceWoman
over a year ago

Birmingham

Because she was a minor under the law where 2 of the alleged offenses occurs, and because she also alleges that he was aware she was a victim of sex trafficking.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *TK421-Man
over a year ago

Cheltenham

Do you think he's sweating now?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ettieAndIrvingMan
over a year ago

Derby


"Yes I think he’s slipped down the slippery slope there. Even Harry is doing better than paedophile Andrew right now. Interesting times!

I think it’s more about the crown saving face. His actions or associations to the case could reduce the popularity of the monarchy. I think we should go for a republic anyway. Parasites the lot of them!

I have no love for the Royals and I’d be perfectly happy with a Republic. But I wouldn’t call somebody a paedophile for having sex with a 17 year old. Creepy, yes, but not that. Unless there’s something I don’t know."

The age of consent in the states is 18.

But it's alleged that some of the girls at the parties were under 16.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *inkyeroticaCouple
over a year ago

Ampthill


"

But I wouldn’t call somebody a paedophile for having sex with a 17 year old. Creepy, yes, but not that. Unless there’s something I don’t know."

My understanding is that woman in question was trafficked into the UK to be a sexual plaything for a ring of highly connected people. If that is proven to be the case, then its (rhymes with) tape.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ubal1Man
over a year ago

Newry Down

Andrew will from now on officially have the title:

Persona non grata!

They have irrevocably cut him loose; so much for the Windsor family sticking by their own.

But this move probably adumbrates what is to come in the near future!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *orny PTMan
over a year ago

Peterborough


"Yes I think he’s slipped down the slippery slope there. Even Harry is doing better than paedophile Andrew right now. Interesting times!

I think it’s more about the crown saving face. His actions or associations to the case could reduce the popularity of the monarchy. I think we should go for a republic anyway. Parasites the lot of them!

I have no love for the Royals and I’d be perfectly happy with a Republic. But I wouldn’t call somebody a paedophile for having sex with a 17 year old. Creepy, yes, but not that. Unless there’s something I don’t know."

There is. What is the Age of Consent over in the States and which states are involved it can vary from 16, 17 and 18 years of age, so that will also make a difference, seeing as New York and Jersey are next door to each other. This would be common knowledge to any American over there.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *orny PTMan
over a year ago

Peterborough

What is wrong with the Royals. Don't they have advisors to tell them what's what and don't Special Branch and the security services monitor who they are mixing with with?

I find it hard to believe that MI5 & MI6 had no idea who Randy Andy was partying with.

Jimmy Saville, Epstein and cohorts, who else did he get involved with?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iamondCougarWoman
over a year ago

Norfuck! / Lincolnshire

I do think perhaps he got caught up in it and at the time didn’t consider the consequences it may have in the future.

I’ve watched the documentary…… a lot of people got caught up in Eppstein and Maxwells web

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ucka39Man
over a year ago

Newcastle


"Yes I think he’s slipped down the slippery slope there. Even Harry is doing better than paedophile Andrew right now. Interesting times!

I think it’s more about the crown saving face. His actions or associations to the case could reduce the popularity of the monarchy. I think we should go for a republic anyway. Parasites the lot of them!

I have no love for the Royals and I’d be perfectly happy with a Republic. But I wouldn’t call somebody a paedophile for having sex with a 17 year old. Creepy, yes, but not that. Unless there’s something I don’t know.

The age of consent in the states is 18.

But it's alleged that some of the girls at the parties were under 16.

"

Not in all the states

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ayjay218Man
over a year ago

Aberdeen


"What is wrong with the Royals. Don't they have advisors to tell them what's what and don't Special Branch and the security services monitor who they are mixing with with?

I find it hard to believe that MI5 & MI6 had no idea who Randy Andy was partying with.

Jimmy Saville, Epstein and cohorts, who else did he get involved with?"
Boris Johnson has advisors and special branch security yet he still does what he wants?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By *orny PTMan
over a year ago

Peterborough


"What is wrong with the Royals. Don't they have advisors to tell them what's what and don't Special Branch and the security services monitor who they are mixing with with?

I find it hard to believe that MI5 & MI6 had no idea who Randy Andy was partying with.

Jimmy Saville, Epstein and cohorts, who else did he get involved with? Boris Johnson has advisors and special branch security yet he still does what he wants? "

You know that voice in your head that says "this is wrong and I shouldn't do this"? This voice gets quieter when alcohol is involved. Boris doesn't have that voice.

We call that voice common sense.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top