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 *akie32 OP   Man
over a year ago

winchester

im sure this has been posted before but my serch dosnt show it

bt should he go to court, personaly i would like him to, it would end all the talk , if hes is not guilty he gets to go home with a clear name, if not then he goes to prison

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire

It's a civil case..

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *allySlinkyWoman
over a year ago

Leeds


"im sure this has been posted before but my serch dosnt show it

"

What were you searching ? There are ten threads about Prince Andrew

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *otMe66Man
over a year ago

Terra Firma


"im sure this has been posted before but my serch dosnt show it

bt should he go to court, personaly i would like him to, it would end all the talk , if hes is not guilty he gets to go home with a clear name, if not then he goes to prison"

This is a civil case so no chance of prison.. I would wager a hefty sum the outcome will run something like this.

Andrew's team will make lots of noise, which they already have started doing. They will make out he will be fighting this all the way.

He will then make a deal out of court and he will say, the only reason he did this was to stop the press intrusions and distractions that are blighting the Queen's platinum jubilee.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *partharmonyCouple
over a year ago

Ruislip

Apperently he's given up some golf club honorary membership. Some go to prison, some have to find a new golf club. It's all justice, eh?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central


"im sure this has been posted before but my serch dosnt show it

bt should he go to court, personaly i would like him to, it would end all the talk , if hes is not guilty he gets to go home with a clear name, if not then he goes to prison

This is a civil case so no chance of prison.. I would wager a hefty sum the outcome will run something like this.

Andrew's team will make lots of noise, which they already have started doing. They will make out he will be fighting this all the way.

He will then make a deal out of court and he will say, the only reason he did this was to stop the press intrusions and distractions that are blighting the Queen's platinum jubilee.

"

He will want to do it this way I think, too. She seems to want court attendance as much, if not more than compensation. And a public apology and recognition of the harms done.

Will he be willing to pay so much more than it could have otherwise been?

His filings this week still show his contempt for victims. He's filth.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

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

both sides want to go to jury trial. that would be a criminal case and would have a jail term associated with it.

from his side of it he then does not need to do anything. its all on her to provide enough evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubt his guilt to the jury.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *andare63Man
over a year ago

oldham


"both sides want to go to jury trial. that would be a criminal case and would have a jail term associated with it.

from his side of it he then does not need to do anything. its all on her to provide enough evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubt his guilt to the jury.

"

It's a civil case by jury this involves no jail term

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *otMe66Man
over a year ago

Terra Firma


"im sure this has been posted before but my serch dosnt show it

bt should he go to court, personaly i would like him to, it would end all the talk , if hes is not guilty he gets to go home with a clear name, if not then he goes to prison

This is a civil case so no chance of prison.. I would wager a hefty sum the outcome will run something like this.

Andrew's team will make lots of noise, which they already have started doing. They will make out he will be fighting this all the way.

He will then make a deal out of court and he will say, the only reason he did this was to stop the press intrusions and distractions that are blighting the Queen's platinum jubilee.

He will want to do it this way I think, too. She seems to want court attendance as much, if not more than compensation. And a public apology and recognition of the harms done.

Will he be willing to pay so much more than it could have otherwise been?

His filings this week still show his contempt for victims. He's filth. "

I agree she really wants the court case and she wants the apology, she is a smart one for sure.

The compensation will be high but the rights to the story could be even higher and with everything signed sealed and delivered there will be no room for legal proceedings to stop or block any film or books to come out of the back of this.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *orthernguyXXXMan
over a year ago

ashington

Why doesn't he just admit he shagged her

She knew exactly what she was there for

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

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


"im sure this has been posted before but my serch dosnt show it

bt should he go to court, personaly i would like him to, it would end all the talk , if hes is not guilty he gets to go home with a clear name, if not then he goes to prison"

The only thing Andrew is guilty of is reputation by association.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

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


"Apperently he's given up some golf club honorary membership. Some go to prison, some have to find a new golf club. It's all justice, eh? "

Lol poor guy, he's suffered enough

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *aulupforitMan
over a year ago

Corbridge

So the backhander won so no dirty washing aired in public domain

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ucka39Man
over a year ago

Newcastle


"So the backhander won so no dirty washing aired in public domain"

I'm actually shocked, thought way all the females were talking it was time to make everyone get punished even saying wasn't going to take a settlement if offered it was more about getting justice.the rest whom were going to be under investigation.cases get dropped as well.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

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

It was like a Micheal , Macaulay Culkin scenario .

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ovebjsMan
over a year ago

Bristol


"So the backhander won so no dirty washing aired in public domain

I'm actually shocked, thought way all the females were talking it was time to make everyone get punished even saying wasn't going to take a settlement if offered it was more about getting justice.the rest whom were going to be under investigation.cases get dropped as well."

It was always gong to be about the money as there was no real proof

Even the original photo seems to have disappeared

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central


"Why doesn't he just admit he shagged her

She knew exactly what she was there for "

Sounds like victim blaming

Andrew may now have done the 1st decent thing in a long, long while.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ucka39Man
over a year ago

Newcastle


"So the backhander won so no dirty washing aired in public domain

I'm actually shocked, thought way all the females were talking it was time to make everyone get punished even saying wasn't going to take a settlement if offered it was more about getting justice.the rest whom were going to be under investigation.cases get dropped as well.

It was always gong to be about the money as there was no real proof

Even the original photo seems to have disappeared "

But flight records and randy Andy letting a young girl out Epstein apartment and giving a wave fact or fiction I don't think it's over I believe others will come forward

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

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

If Maxwell gets a hefty sentence she will have nothing to lose and may well spill the beans dropping Andrew in it, if he has indeed done the dirty deeds. Who is taking bets she dies in prison too?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *oeSurreyMan
over a year ago

Woking

The case has been settled he’s paying her off, whatever the legal jargon states.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

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


"So the backhander won so no dirty washing aired in public domain"

Reading about the settlement (as much as is in the public domain), it looks like they had him over a barrel, with the occasional fig leaf term to try to make him look like a good guy or at least a reformed character.

IS

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ixey and CopperCouple
over a year ago

Exeter

Why accept a settlement

Should take it all the way to court

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *icolerobbieCouple
over a year ago

walsall

Well if she’s accepted the payout, then it proves beyond any doubt that she was only in it for the payout. Otherwise she wouldn’t have accepted it.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *akie32 OP   Man
over a year ago

winchester


"Well if she’s accepted the payout, then it proves beyond any doubt that she was only in it for the payout. Otherwise she wouldn’t have accepted it."

of course she took the money, who would turn down a huge setlment, i dont blame her for that, but it should have been brought to trial regardles, i hate that rich people can buy out of trouble, but thats the way of the world, but i bet we havnt heard the last of this, and i hope not. And having his mum foot the bill is even worse, how in his life as a royal with his conections, hasnt he made enough to pay for it himself, he has always used other peoples money, a compleat toad and a disgrace to the royal family, bet the queen is seathing

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *icolerobbieCouple
over a year ago

walsall


"Well if she’s accepted the payout, then it proves beyond any doubt that she was only in it for the payout. Otherwise she wouldn’t have accepted it.

of course she took the money, who would turn down a huge setlment, i dont blame her for that, but it should have been brought to trial regardles, i hate that rich people can buy out of trouble, but thats the way of the world, but i bet we havnt heard the last of this, and i hope not. And having his mum foot the bill is even worse, how in his life as a royal with his conections, hasnt he made enough to pay for it himself, he has always used other peoples money, a compleat toad and a disgrace to the royal family, bet the queen is seathing"

The thing is, she claimed that she wasn’t in it for the money. She wanted justice, but chose the money instead.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

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


"Well if she’s accepted the payout, then it proves beyond any doubt that she was only in it for the payout. Otherwise she wouldn’t have accepted it."

You do realise that it's a civil trial and should she win the remedy would just be money anyway? Albeit possibly more or less depending on the jury's decision.

It would be an odd decision to go through with the trial, especially as the settlement was almost definitely above $10mil

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *orduneCouple
over a year ago

darvel

He is a total disgrace of a man should be axed as a royal , no financial support.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *icolerobbieCouple
over a year ago

walsall


"Well if she’s accepted the payout, then it proves beyond any doubt that she was only in it for the payout. Otherwise she wouldn’t have accepted it.

You do realise that it's a civil trial and should she win the remedy would just be money anyway? Albeit possibly more or less depending on the jury's decision.

It would be an odd decision to go through with the trial, especially as the settlement was almost definitely above $10mil"

Agreed, she was never in it for the justice as was claimed.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

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


"

Agreed, she was never in it for the justice as was claimed."

I think you might be misunderstanding. She doesn't have the ability to bring a criminal charge against Andrew herself, only a civil case. To which the 'punishment' is almost always just financial. There's no other option for her.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *icolerobbieCouple
over a year ago

walsall


"

Agreed, she was never in it for the justice as was claimed.

I think you might be misunderstanding. She doesn't have the ability to bring a criminal charge against Andrew herself, only a civil case. To which the 'punishment' is almost always just financial. There's no other option for her."

I do understand. It was the fact that she claimed that she wasn’t in it for money and then went straight for the money. She didn’t have to bring a civil trial.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

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


"

Agreed, she was never in it for the justice as was claimed.

I think you might be misunderstanding. She doesn't have the ability to bring a criminal charge against Andrew herself, only a civil case. To which the 'punishment' is almost always just financial. There's no other option for her.

I do understand. It was the fact that she claimed that she wasn’t in it for money and then went straight for the money. She didn’t have to bring a civil trial."

But obviously you would? I can't imagine I wouldn't do the same in her situation, if I knew he wasn't going to prison.

The settlement in most people's eyes is an admission of guilt. It certainly damages his image.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *icolerobbieCouple
over a year ago

walsall


"

Agreed, she was never in it for the justice as was claimed.

I think you might be misunderstanding. She doesn't have the ability to bring a criminal charge against Andrew herself, only a civil case. To which the 'punishment' is almost always just financial. There's no other option for her.

I do understand. It was the fact that she claimed that she wasn’t in it for money and then went straight for the money. She didn’t have to bring a civil trial.

But obviously you would? I can't imagine I wouldn't do the same in her situation, if I knew he wasn't going to prison.

The settlement in most people's eyes is an admission of guilt. It certainly damages his image."

But would you make a statement saying that it’s not about the money, then when you see a decent bid grab it?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

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


"

But would you make a statement saying that it’s not about the money, then when you see a decent bid grab it?

"

The reality is you'd be mad not to take it. Why spend months on a trial you've already won?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *itzi999Woman
over a year ago

Slough


"The settlement in most people's eyes is an admission of guilt. It certainly damages his image."

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *icolerobbieCouple
over a year ago

walsall


"

But would you make a statement saying that it’s not about the money, then when you see a decent bid grab it?

The reality is you'd be mad not to take it. Why spend months on a trial you've already won?"

But she hasn’t had her justice.

I’m guessing the the payment is “without prejudice”.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *icolerobbieCouple
over a year ago

walsall


"The settlement in most people's eyes is an admission of guilt. It certainly damages his image.

"

I don’t think there’s much left to damage…

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ucka39Man
over a year ago

Newcastle

Continuing with the trial would've opened up cases regarding the rest of the guys whom were also under suspicion apparently the FBI had found the photo off Andrew back in 2011 when Epstein was charged back then and given 18 months after pleading guilty so Andrew would've known then what he was yet still was in contact with them both

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *akie32 OP   Man
over a year ago

winchester


"

But would you make a statement saying that it’s not about the money, then when you see a decent bid grab it?

The reality is you'd be mad not to take it. Why spend months on a trial you've already won?

But she hasn’t had her justice.

I’m guessing the the payment is “without prejudice”."

the fact he paid does mean she wone, it just was a quicker way of doing it, if andrew thought he would win he would have forced the trial and cleared his name, in a civil trial in the us money is really the only outcome, so take the cheque early and save yourself alot of agro, no brainer really, and now the hole world know hes guilty, i call that a win for her.

personaly i would have liked to see him in prison, but that was never going to happen

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *rFunBoyMan
over a year ago

Longridge


"both sides want to go to jury trial. that would be a criminal case and would have a jail term associated with it.

from his side of it he then does not need to do anything. its all on her to provide enough evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubt his guilt to the jury.

It's a civil case by jury this involves no jail term "

No jail, but we the public, can see the outcome of a trial by jury.

VG insisted she would continue the trial to its conclusion and this not about the money, it was about the truth.

Very disappointed as now, we'll never know, although my mind is made up in the way he's behaved.

I hope never to see him again in public life..

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ucka39Man
over a year ago

Newcastle

I just hope Maxwell cuts a deal and brings everyone down or other victims come forward since the Ireland was full of young females

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *akie32 OP   Man
over a year ago

winchester


"I just hope Maxwell cuts a deal and brings everyone down or other victims come forward since the Ireland was full of young females"

thats it im off to ireland for my next holiday then lol

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ucka39Man
over a year ago

Newcastle


"I just hope Maxwell cuts a deal and brings everyone down or other victims come forward since the Ireland was full of young females

thats it im off to ireland for my next holiday then lol"

Island I'm in bed

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *heshbifellaMan
over a year ago

Nantwich


"im sure this has been posted before but my serch dosnt show it

bt should he go to court, personaly i would like him to, it would end all the talk , if hes is not guilty he gets to go home with a clear name, if not then he goes to prison

This is a civil case so no chance of prison.. I would wager a hefty sum the outcome will run something like this.

Andrew's team will make lots of noise, which they already have started doing. They will make out he will be fighting this all the way.

He will then make a deal out of court and he will say, the only reason he did this was to stop the press intrusions and distractions that are blighting the Queen's platinum jubilee.

"

This post was bang on the money

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *heshbifellaMan
over a year ago

Nantwich


"The case has been settled he’s paying her off, whatever the legal jargon states."

The money is going to a victims' charity

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *heshbifellaMan
over a year ago

Nantwich


"

Agreed, she was never in it for the justice as was claimed.

I think you might be misunderstanding. She doesn't have the ability to bring a criminal charge against Andrew herself, only a civil case. To which the 'punishment' is almost always just financial. There's no other option for her.

I do understand. It was the fact that she claimed that she wasn’t in it for money and then went straight for the money. She didn’t have to bring a civil trial."

She was doing it for the victims. All the money is going to a victims' charity

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *echnosonic_BrummieMan
over a year ago

Willenhall


"

All the money is going to a victims' charity "

There is a settlement and what appears to be a separate agreement to make a donation to Ms. Guiffre's charity.

A settlement and a donation are typically two disparate things.

I just hope we can all afford it now the prices of gas and petrol are going through the roof...

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *echnosonic_BrummieMan
over a year ago

Willenhall

Apparently, there's now a zero chance he'll ever get his royal titles back.

So, what we do we call him now?

The (alleged) sex offender formerly known as Prince?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

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

Hes a paedo that's it disgraceful

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

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


"Well if she’s accepted the payout, then it proves beyond any doubt that she was only in it for the payout. Otherwise she wouldn’t have accepted it."

Nice little pay day

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

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


"

All the money is going to a victims' charity

There is a settlement and what appears to be a separate agreement to make a donation to Ms. Guiffre's charity.

A settlement and a donation are typically two disparate things.

I just hope we can all afford it now the prices of gas and petrol are going through the roof..."

We?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *riar BelisseWoman
over a year ago

Delightful Bliss


"Hes a paedo that's it disgraceful "

Was he convicted in the eyes of the law as one...

Or is it guilty until proven innocent now...

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *rwhowhatwherewhyMan
over a year ago

Aylesbury


"Hes a paedo that's it disgraceful "

Well he isn't. At worst he is a pedarast, but to be honest I dont think he is one. He is just part of the wealthy elite that really fucked up.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *orksRockerMan
over a year ago

Bradford


"Hes a paedo that's it disgraceful

Was he convicted in the eyes of the law as one...

Or is it guilty until proven innocent now..."

This is why it was soooooo important for him to go to trial and not get out from under the spotlight via a payout. I'm disappointed but do understand that it must be very difficult for Virginia to process.

The statement released by Andrew makes my blood boil.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *arol321Woman
over a year ago

Poole


"

Agreed, she was never in it for the justice as was claimed.

I think you might be misunderstanding. She doesn't have the ability to bring a criminal charge against Andrew herself, only a civil case. To which the 'punishment' is almost always just financial. There's no other option for her."

She always said she wouldn’t settle out of court as she wanted justice. She wanted to hear him ‘admit what he did’. That was obviously a pack of lies - she wanted the money in the same way she settled with Epstein albeit for ’only’ $500,000. She could have gone for justice then but didn’t. The money was more important then - same as it is now.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *UGGYBEAR2015Man
over a year ago

BRIDPORT


"Apparently, there's now a zero chance he'll ever get his royal titles back.

So, what we do we call him now?

The (alleged) sex offender formerly known as Prince?"

I imagine you would call him by his name Andrew Windsor, or is that too complicated to work out.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

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


"

Agreed, she was never in it for the justice as was claimed.

I think you might be misunderstanding. She doesn't have the ability to bring a criminal charge against Andrew herself, only a civil case. To which the 'punishment' is almost always just financial. There's no other option for her.

She always said she wouldn’t settle out of court as she wanted justice. She wanted to hear him ‘admit what he did’. That was obviously a pack of lies - she wanted the money in the same way she settled with Epstein albeit for ’only’ $500,000. She could have gone for justice then but didn’t. The money was more important then - same as it is now. "

By taking this way out, although he hasn't admitted any liability, the judgement of public opinion will be very damaging for Andrew. I don't think she would have had a much better outcome had she had her day in court. She would have also burnt a huge amount of cash on legal fees.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

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

Victim blaming is not the way forward, truth is she took the money because there would be no other outcome. Money is power, he would never have faced any justice or even made it to trial.

Instead of trying to work out her motives, focus your attention on the corruption that goes on in this world. Too many people who are rich and powerful use their status to abuse other's with no consequence.

So in June when your all celebrating how wonderful the Queen is, remember who paid this woman to end this. It certainly didn't come out of Andrew's pocket. If this was a normal person like you and I, everyone would be saying lock him up. It wouldn't even come into question what the woman's motives were.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *orksRockerMan
over a year ago

Bradford


"Victim blaming is not the way forward, truth is she took the money because there would be no other outcome. Money is power, he would never have faced any justice or even made it to trial.

Instead of trying to work out her motives, focus your attention on the corruption that goes on in this world. Too many people who are rich and powerful use their status to abuse other's with no consequence.

So in June when your all celebrating how wonderful the Queen is, remember who paid this woman to end this. It certainly didn't come out of Andrew's pocket. If this was a normal person like you and I, everyone would be saying lock him up. It wouldn't even come into question what the woman's motives were."

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

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


"Victim blaming is not the way forward, truth is she took the money because there would be no other outcome. Money is power, he would never have faced any justice or even made it to trial.

Instead of trying to work out her motives, focus your attention on the corruption that goes on in this world. Too many people who are rich and powerful use their status to abuse other's with no consequence.

So in June when your all celebrating how wonderful the Queen is, remember who paid this woman to end this. It certainly didn't come out of Andrew's pocket. If this was a normal person like you and I, everyone would be saying lock him up. It wouldn't even come into question what the woman's motives were."

Summed up perfectly

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

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


"Victim blaming is not the way forward, truth is she took the money because there would be no other outcome. Money is power, he would never have faced any justice or even made it to trial.

Instead of trying to work out her motives, focus your attention on the corruption that goes on in this world. Too many people who are rich and powerful use their status to abuse other's with no consequence.

So in June when your all celebrating how wonderful the Queen is, remember who paid this woman to end this. It certainly didn't come out of Andrew's pocket. If this was a normal person like you and I, everyone would be saying lock him up. It wouldn't even come into question what the woman's motives were."

It's amazing that you have personal insight into their financial situation.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ittle_brat_evie!!Woman
over a year ago

evesham


"

Agreed, she was never in it for the justice as was claimed.

I think you might be misunderstanding. She doesn't have the ability to bring a criminal charge against Andrew herself, only a civil case. To which the 'punishment' is almost always just financial. There's no other option for her.

She always said she wouldn’t settle out of court as she wanted justice. She wanted to hear him ‘admit what he did’. That was obviously a pack of lies - she wanted the money in the same way she settled with Epstein albeit for ’only’ $500,000. She could have gone for justice then but didn’t. The money was more important then - same as it is now. "

Isn't the money going to a charity, not directly to her?

Isn't it funny how he'd give (I assume) thousands of pounds to someone he never met

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ranny-CrumpetWoman
over a year ago

The Town by The Cross


"Hes a paedo that's it disgraceful

Well he isn't. At worst he is a pedarast, but to be honest I dont think he is one. He is just part of the wealthy elite that really fucked up."

A pederast ? That would probably shock Giuffre .... she's a woman.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ranny-CrumpetWoman
over a year ago

The Town by The Cross


"Hes a paedo that's it disgraceful "

No he isn't. Not even if he had sex with a 17 year old every day of his life.

He is not a paedophile.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *rwhowhatwherewhyMan
over a year ago

Aylesbury


"Hes a paedo that's it disgraceful

Well he isn't. At worst he is a pedarast, but to be honest I dont think he is one. He is just part of the wealthy elite that really fucked up.

A pederast ? That would probably shock Giuffre .... she's a woman."

Then I clearly have a wrong definition...

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

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

From seeing further evidence and the background history of this person, IMHO I believe Prince Andrew is innocent.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ranny-CrumpetWoman
over a year ago

The Town by The Cross


"From seeing further evidence and the background history of this person, IMHO I believe Prince Andrew is innocent. "

Background history of who ?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ranny-CrumpetWoman
over a year ago

The Town by The Cross


"From seeing further evidence and the background history of this person, IMHO I believe Prince Andrew is innocent.

Background history of who ?"

Andrew Windsor or Giuffre ?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *immyinreadingMan
over a year ago

henley on thames


"im sure this has been posted before but my serch dosnt show it

bt should he go to court, personaly i would like him to, it would end all the talk , if hes is not guilty he gets to go home with a clear name, if not then he goes to prison

This is a civil case so no chance of prison.. I would wager a hefty sum the outcome will run something like this.

Andrew's team will make lots of noise, which they already have started doing. They will make out he will be fighting this all the way.

He will then make a deal out of court and he will say, the only reason he did this was to stop the press intrusions and distractions that are blighting the Queen's platinum jubilee.

"

Spot on!

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *immyinreadingMan
over a year ago

henley on thames


"Apparently, there's now a zero chance he'll ever get his royal titles back.

So, what we do we call him now?

The (alleged) sex offender formerly known as Prince?"

He will still be Prince Andrew, won’t he?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

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

He is still Prince just not HRH or any patrons of clubs/military etc. So no royal duties can be undertaken by him again.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *allySlinkyWoman
over a year ago

Leeds


"From seeing further evidence and the background history of this person, IMHO I believe Prince Andrew is innocent. "

Why would an innocent man pay £12 million compensation ?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

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


"From seeing further evidence and the background history of this person, IMHO I believe Prince Andrew is innocent.

Why would an innocent man pay £12 million compensation ?"

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ucka39Man
over a year ago

Newcastle

Given the amount of damaging evidence that the FBI recovered why isn't the federal judge letting everything out in the open he's either been bought or he's part of the elite

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *allySlinkyWoman
over a year ago

Leeds

If Andrew went to court, what is the most severe punishment he could be given ?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *usie pTV/TS
over a year ago

taunton

I guess only two people know the truth in all this, Andrew has probably had that much young pussy he may not even be sure himself, ultimately can only do good if the disgusting ways of the wealthy and privileged are exposed. With things that have come out I personally think Andrew would be hard pressed to call himself a man let alone anything else.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *yron69Man
over a year ago

Fareham

If I was a prince back in the day I’d certainly have had mistresses. Hopefully I’d have shown caution around creeps like Epstein but I reckon half the people you meet as a royal would have skeletons in their closets.

I’m giving him the benefit of the doubt despite his reputation. Mind you he has proven his stupidity. Time to move on.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *rFunBoyMan
over a year ago

Longridge


"Well if she’s accepted the payout, then it proves beyond any doubt that she was only in it for the payout. Otherwise she wouldn’t have accepted it.

Nice little pay day "

So much for wanting her day in court, it's nothing to with the money!

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

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


"Hes a paedo that's it disgraceful

No he isn't. Not even if he had sex with a 17 year old every day of his life.

He is not a paedophile. "

Given he allegedly had sex with a young woman who was under the legal age of consent (based on the country the alleged act took place) but post puberty then I guess ephebophilia / an ephebophile would be the most appropriate term for Andrew.

Feels like he has bought his way out of it though.

Hopefully the public won't forget and will push bsck against any future rehabilitation of aandrews name.

KJ

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ucka39Man
over a year ago

Newcastle

Thing I find difficult to understand why set up a charity for victims when all the victims might have been relying on her to proceed in court so further victims could come forward she is a disgrace to all victims

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *immyinreadingMan
over a year ago

henley on thames


"Given the amount of damaging evidence that the FBI recovered why isn't the federal judge letting everything out in the open he's either been bought or he's part of the elite"

That’s not how the legal system works.

A plaintiff sued someone and settled out of court, there ends the involvement of the judge

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *oonshadowWoman
over a year ago

COVENTRY

His teddies wouldn't survive prison

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

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


"His teddies wouldn't survive prison"

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *immyinreadingMan
over a year ago

henley on thames


"I guess only two people know the truth in all this, Andrew has probably had that much young pussy he may not even be sure himself, ultimately can only do good if the disgusting ways of the wealthy and privileged are exposed. With things that have come out I personally think Andrew would be hard pressed to call himself a man let alone anything else."

It’s a bit of a cop-out blaming rich people in general for this sort of behaviour. There are creeps with poor moral compasses in all corners of society. No point trying to kid ourselves that it’s just corrupt powerful people who behave in bad ways. But it’s usually only rich people who get sued ...

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *immyinreadingMan
over a year ago

henley on thames


"Hes a paedo that's it disgraceful

No he isn't. Not even if he had sex with a 17 year old every day of his life.

He is not a paedophile.

Given he allegedly had sex with a young woman who was under the legal age of consent (based on the country the alleged act took place) but post puberty then I guess ephebophilia / an ephebophile would be the most appropriate term for Andrew.

Feels like he has bought his way out of it though.

Hopefully the public won't forget and will push bsck against any future rehabilitation of aandrews name.

KJ"

I can’t see any possibility of attempts to rehabilitate his image, so wouldn’t worry too much about mustering a push/back against this imaginary outcome

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ucka39Man
over a year ago

Newcastle


"Given the amount of damaging evidence that the FBI recovered why isn't the federal judge letting everything out in the open he's either been bought or he's part of the elite

That’s not how the legal system works.

A plaintiff sued someone and settled out of court, there ends the involvement of the judge "

Their are guidelines the law itself must follow and regardless how defendants are if the evidence over weighs.... Just like if a person doesn't want to proceed the law itself can when their is overwhelming evidence like so

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *immyinreadingMan
over a year ago

henley on thames


"Well if she’s accepted the payout, then it proves beyond any doubt that she was only in it for the payout. Otherwise she wouldn’t have accepted it.

Nice little pay day

So much for wanting her day in court, it's nothing to with the money!"

If does seem to go against the entire message that had been coming out of her camp, that this was all about getting it all out in the open and having her day in court.

For the second time, she has taken a payoff instead.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *immyinreadingMan
over a year ago

henley on thames


"Given the amount of damaging evidence that the FBI recovered why isn't the federal judge letting everything out in the open he's either been bought or he's part of the elite

That’s not how the legal system works.

A plaintiff sued someone and settled out of court, there ends the involvement of the judge

Their are guidelines the law itself must follow and regardless how defendants are if the evidence over weighs.... Just like if a person doesn't want to proceed the law itself can when their is overwhelming evidence like so "

This was a civil case, not a criminal one. If the plaintiff drops a civil case that’s the end of the matter as far as the judge is concerned.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

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


"she is a disgrace to all victims"

Ridiculous notion, this wasn't a criminal case.

Andrew wouldn't have faced any jail time.

It would have always resulted in a cash settlement and yes some would probably come back and say but he might've been found liable and that maybe true but it wouldn't be a criminal conviction.

He'd still be free and does any right thinking person now think he wasn't liable, she took action, exposed him without a criminal trial, if that's not an example to other victims in lieu of criminal proceedings I don't know what is.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *immyinreadingMan
over a year ago

henley on thames


"If Andrew went to court, what is the most severe punishment he could be given ?"

As it was a civil case, the worst outcome would have been a large compensation payment

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

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


"Apperently he's given up some golf club honorary membership. Some go to prison, some have to find a new golf club. It's all justice, eh? "

He wouldn't have gone to prison whatever the outcome of the civil case.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *immyinreadingMan
over a year ago

henley on thames


"Apperently he's given up some golf club honorary membership. Some go to prison, some have to find a new golf club. It's all justice, eh?

He wouldn't have gone to prison whatever the outcome of the civil case."

I can’t believe that some people still think that prison time was a possible outcome for this civil case ... do people just read headlines and then make the rest up themselves?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ucka39Man
over a year ago

Newcastle

Either way we the tax payers are going to pay another increase topping up the treasury of the royal family

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ucka39Man
over a year ago

Newcastle

Since it's a payout the amount will come out for tax purposes some how

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *immyinreadingMan
over a year ago

henley on thames


"Either way we the tax payers are going to pay another increase topping up the treasury of the royal family"

No. The money will come from the vast piles of our cash that the royal family have already stashed away.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *immyinreadingMan
over a year ago

henley on thames


"Since it's a payout the amount will come out for tax purposes some how"

Very very unlikely.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ucka39Man
over a year ago

Newcastle


"Since it's a payout the amount will come out for tax purposes some how

Very very unlikely. "

Anything is possible no body expected she would accept the offer things get leaked and people are most likely on it already as we speak

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *immyinreadingMan
over a year ago

henley on thames


"Since it's a payout the amount will come out for tax purposes some how

Very very unlikely.

Anything is possible no body expected she would accept the offer things get leaked and people are most likely on it already as we speak"

Numbers will be kicked around, 10 and 12 million have already been published in today’s papers.

The post I was replying to was suggesting that the exact figure would come out at some stage “for tax purposes”. It is highly unlikely that this will happen. He won’t publish the figure and she will legally be prohibited from publishing it.

The amount of her previous payout was only published when a judge unsealed the agreement

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *immyinreadingMan
over a year ago

henley on thames


"Since it's a payout the amount will come out for tax purposes some how

Very very unlikely.

Anything is possible no body expected she would accept the offer things get leaked and people are most likely on it already as we speak"

Publishing details of a settlement agreement is illegal.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *m3232Man
over a year ago

maidenhead


"Well if she’s accepted the payout, then it proves beyond any doubt that she was only in it for the payout. Otherwise she wouldn’t have accepted it."

She also had a payout years ago from Epstein.

She was definitely in it for the money.

He without doubt had sex with her but my guess he didn’t know or even think she was underage.

Very grey area and you do feel sorry for her and those who suffered the same fate.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *rhugesMan
over a year ago

Cardiff

I really really don't like the guy at all, but I don't believe he slept with her against her will. The girl in question wanted to sleep with him so she could say she had slept with a prince.

She got $500000 from Epstein and now £12 million from the Royals. I think all of that £12million should go to charities not a gold digging girl.

The world has gone mad

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *dd_soxMan
over a year ago

Suffolk

Maybe his team simply decided it was cheaper to settle out of court rather than pay vast sums in legal fees.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ranny-CrumpetWoman
over a year ago

The Town by The Cross


"Hes a paedo that's it disgraceful

No he isn't. Not even if he had sex with a 17 year old every day of his life.

He is not a paedophile.

Given he allegedly had sex with a young woman who was under the legal age of consent (based on the country the alleged act took place) but post puberty then I guess ephebophilia / an ephebophile would be the most appropriate term for Andrew.

Feels like he has bought his way out of it though.

Hopefully the public won't forget and will push bsck against any future rehabilitation of aandrews name.

KJ"

If we are looking for terms i'd put him in the teleiophile ( full grown woman ) category.

If I can use my own words instead of a Greek accurate I'd say .... Ignorant, Narcissistic, Privileged , Entitled cunt of a Mummy's boy.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ranny-CrumpetWoman
over a year ago

The Town by The Cross


"I really really don't like the guy at all, but I don't believe he slept with her against her will. The girl in question wanted to sleep with him so she could say she had slept with a prince.

She got $500000 from Epstein and now £12 million from the Royals. I think all of that £12million should go to charities not a gold digging girl.

The world has gone mad"

Some have gone mad. She was underage in American Law....... The money IS going to charity.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ranny-CrumpetWoman
over a year ago

The Town by The Cross


"Hes a paedo that's it disgraceful

No he isn't. Not even if he had sex with a 17 year old every day of his life.

He is not a paedophile.

Given he allegedly had sex with a young woman who was under the legal age of consent (based on the country the alleged act took place) but post puberty then I guess ephebophilia / an ephebophile would be the most appropriate term for Andrew.

Feels like he has bought his way out of it though.

Hopefully the public won't forget and will push bsck against any future rehabilitation of aandrews name.

KJ

If we are looking for terms i'd put him in the teleiophile ( full grown woman ) category.

If I can use my own words instead of a Greek accurate I'd say .... Ignorant, Narcissistic, Privileged , Entitled cunt of a Mummy's boy. "

I forgot STUPID ...... so fucking thick he'd have been like a child in a sweety shop thinking Nanny would be very cross.... but NEVER being able to comprehend the gravity and consequences of his actions... TWAT

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ucka39Man
over a year ago

Newcastle


"Since it's a payout the amount will come out for tax purposes some how

Very very unlikely.

Anything is possible no body expected she would accept the offer things get leaked and people are most likely on it already as we speak

Publishing details of a settlement agreement is illegal. "

I never mentioned being published things get leaked same as the phoning hacking

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *andare63Man
over a year ago

oldham

There are not enough words that can sum up the low life piece of shit he is.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ucka39Man
over a year ago

Newcastle


"I really really don't like the guy at all, but I don't believe he slept with her against her will. The girl in question wanted to sleep with him so she could say she had slept with a prince.

She got $500000 from Epstein and now £12 million from the Royals. I think all of that £12million should go to charities not a gold digging girl.

The world has gone mad"

News papers always tell the truth they say what they like as a story which people run to buy and start believing everything

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *good-being-badMan
over a year ago

mis-types and auto corrects leads cock leeds

In an unexpected twist, Prince Andrew is now paying Virginia Giuffre to keep her mouth closed.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *traight_no_iceMan
over a year ago

Stoke

I was looking forward for the trial. For the prince to clear his name and for Virginia to prove she was telling the truth.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *orkiebar51Man
over a year ago

Keighley


"

But would you make a statement saying that it’s not about the money, then when you see a decent bid grab it?

The reality is you'd be mad not to take it. Why spend months on a trial you've already won?

But she hasn’t had her justice.

I’m guessing the the payment is “without prejudice”.

the fact he paid does mean she wone, it just was a quicker way of doing it, if andrew thought he would win he would have forced the trial and cleared his name, in a civil trial in the us money is really the only outcome, so take the cheque early and save yourself alot of agro, no brainer really, and now the hole world know hes guilty, i call that a win for her.

personaly i would have liked to see him in prison, but that was never going to happen"

You don't get jail time for shagging a 17 year old prostitute in the UK

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *orkiebar51Man
over a year ago

Keighley


"Hes a paedo that's it disgraceful "

Shagging a 17 year old prostitute doesn't make anyone a paedophile

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *orkiebar51Man
over a year ago

Keighley


"Victim blaming is not the way forward, truth is she took the money because there would be no other outcome. Money is power, he would never have faced any justice or even made it to trial.

Instead of trying to work out her motives, focus your attention on the corruption that goes on in this world. Too many people who are rich and powerful use their status to abuse other's with no consequence.

So in June when your all celebrating how wonderful the Queen is, remember who paid this woman to end this. It certainly didn't come out of Andrew's pocket. If this was a normal person like you and I, everyone would be saying lock him up. It wouldn't even come into question what the woman's motives were."

Please educate us on the crime he's comitted. He certainly didn't break any UK law by shagging a 17 year old prostitute

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *orkiebar51Man
over a year ago

Keighley


"Given the amount of damaging evidence that the FBI recovered why isn't the federal judge letting everything out in the open he's either been bought or he's part of the elite"

Ahhhhhh...............yet another FBI employee posting in here

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

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


"

Please educate us on the crime he's comitted. He certainly didn't break any UK law by shagging a 17 year old prostitute"

Literally Section 1 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *orkiebar51Man
over a year ago

Keighley


"I really really don't like the guy at all, but I don't believe he slept with her against her will. The girl in question wanted to sleep with him so she could say she had slept with a prince.

She got $500000 from Epstein and now £12 million from the Royals. I think all of that £12million should go to charities not a gold digging girl.

The world has gone mad

Some have gone mad. She was underage in American Law....... The money IS going to charity."

He shagged her in the UK. USA law does not apply in the UK

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *orkiebar51Man
over a year ago

Keighley


"

Please educate us on the crime he's comitted. He certainly didn't break any UK law by shagging a 17 year old prostitute

Literally Section 1 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003"

Which says ??????????

It certainly doesn't say it's a crime to shag a 17 year old prostitute

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ucka39Man
over a year ago

Newcastle


"Given the amount of damaging evidence that the FBI recovered why isn't the federal judge letting everything out in the open he's either been bought or he's part of the elite

Ahhhhhh...............yet another FBI employee posting in here "

Don't need to be I watched amount of things taken by them I'm Guessing that was edited

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ucka39Man
over a year ago

Newcastle


"I really really don't like the guy at all, but I don't believe he slept with her against her will. The girl in question wanted to sleep with him so she could say she had slept with a prince.

She got $500000 from Epstein and now £12 million from the Royals. I think all of that £12million should go to charities not a gold digging girl.

The world has gone mad

Some have gone mad. She was underage in American Law....... The money IS going to charity.

He shagged her in the UK. USA law does not apply in the UK"

But was it just UK she was trafficked all over USA

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

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


"

Please educate us on the crime he's comitted. He certainly didn't break any UK law by shagging a 17 year old prostitute

Literally Section 1 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003

Which says ??????????

It certainly doesn't say it's a crime to shag a 17 year old prostitute"

why do I bother

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

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

Huge queues are forming outside Buckingham Palace as news spreads that Prince Andrew is giving money away to people he has never met

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *aisyandCarlosCouple
over a year ago

fareham

I am sure that Andrew, formerly known as 'Prince' Andrew, would deny having met or had sex with my partner. To save time and any expense I'm sure she would settle for £1million.

On a more serious note if he had sex with the woman in question, it was a huge error of judgement. Depending on the country they had sex in he may have broken the law of that country.

What we don't or will ever know is if he was aware of her being coercised. I suspect he wasn't and either believed Epstein/Maxwell had made financial arrangements or she wanted to sleep with him as he was a Prince.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ucka39Man
over a year ago

Newcastle

Undisclosed amount but seems like it's not a undisclosed amount going by the thread

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ucka39Man
over a year ago

Newcastle


"I am sure that Andrew, formerly known as 'Prince' Andrew, would deny having met or had sex with my partner. To save time and any expense I'm sure she would settle for £1million.

On a more serious note if he had sex with the woman in question, it was a huge error of judgement. Depending on the country they had sex in he may have broken the law of that country.

What we don't or will ever know is if he was aware of her being coercised. I suspect he wasn't and either believed Epstein/Maxwell had made financial arrangements or she wanted to sleep with him as he was a Prince.

"

But Andrew already knew Epstein was a nonce by the 18 months he had already served in prison yet still hung around with him it's on the interview

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

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


"Huge queues are forming outside Buckingham Palace as news spreads that Prince Andrew is giving money away to people he has never met"

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

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

He is a dirty little nonce. He is a guilty as fuck hence the pay off. Let’s hope he stayed out the public eye.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *iss SJWoman
over a year ago

Hull


"I am sure that Andrew, formerly known as 'Prince' Andrew, would deny having met or had sex with my partner. To save time and any expense I'm sure she would settle for £1million.

On a more serious note if he had sex with the woman in question, it was a huge error of judgement. Depending on the country they had sex in he may have broken the law of that country.

What we don't or will ever know is if he was aware of her being coercised. I suspect he wasn't and either believed Epstein/Maxwell had made financial arrangements or she wanted to sleep with him as he was a Prince.

But Andrew already knew Epstein was a nonce by the 18 months he had already served in prison yet still hung around with him it's on the interview "

Ah yes but he decided to stop seeing him in the end. He flew over and spent 5 days in Epstein’s swanky New York apartment so he could tell him he couldn’t see him anymore.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ranny-CrumpetWoman
over a year ago

The Town by The Cross


"I really really don't like the guy at all, but I don't believe he slept with her against her will. The girl in question wanted to sleep with him so she could say she had slept with a prince.

She got $500000 from Epstein and now £12 million from the Royals. I think all of that £12million should go to charities not a gold digging girl.

The world has gone mad

Some have gone mad. She was underage in American Law....... The money IS going to charity.

He shagged her in the UK. USA law does not apply in the UK"

But it applies to a US juvenile.

Why do you keep calling her a prostitute ?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

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


"Victim blaming is not the way forward, truth is she took the money because there would be no other outcome. Money is power, he would never have faced any justice or even made it to trial.

Instead of trying to work out her motives, focus your attention on the corruption that goes on in this world. Too many people who are rich and powerful use their status to abuse other's with no consequence.

So in June when your all celebrating how wonderful the Queen is, remember who paid this woman to end this. It certainly didn't come out of Andrew's pocket. If this was a normal person like you and I, everyone would be saying lock him up. It wouldn't even come into question what the woman's motives were.

It's amazing that you have personal insight into their financial situation. "

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

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


"Hes a paedo that's it disgraceful

No he isn't. Not even if he had sex with a 17 year old every day of his life.

He is not a paedophile.

Given he allegedly had sex with a young woman who was under the legal age of consent (based on the country the alleged act took place) but post puberty then I guess ephebophilia / an ephebophile would be the most appropriate term for Andrew.

Feels like he has bought his way out of it though.

Hopefully the public won't forget and will push bsck against any future rehabilitation of aandrews name.

KJ

If we are looking for terms i'd put him in the teleiophile ( full grown woman ) category.

If I can use my own words instead of a Greek accurate I'd say .... Ignorant, Narcissistic, Privileged , Entitled cunt of a Mummy's boy. "

I thought a teleiophile referred to the following -

"A person who is attracted primarily to mature adults"

"An adolescent or young adult who is sexually attracted only to mature adults; someone who wishes for age disparity in the relationship, usually in favor of a young female and older male. This differs from Gerontophilia"

Given that she was only 17 at the time so not an adult in the eyes of most countries, still a teenager and under the legal age for consentual sex (18 in the location it took place) I genuinely can't see how you could class Andrew as a teleiophile?

Totally agree with all of your 2nd paragraph though.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ucka39Man
over a year ago

Newcastle

Why do you think Epstein wrote an agreement because he himself knew it was a criminal offence Andrew was pissed off because he wasn't added in it now let's see how long before Maxwell squeezles under pressure.... How many would be celebrating come June most of the nation besides myself just an excuse for a piss up

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *orkiebar51Man
over a year ago

Keighley


"I really really don't like the guy at all, but I don't believe he slept with her against her will. The girl in question wanted to sleep with him so she could say she had slept with a prince.

She got $500000 from Epstein and now £12 million from the Royals. I think all of that £12million should go to charities not a gold digging girl.

The world has gone mad

Some have gone mad. She was underage in American Law....... The money IS going to charity.

He shagged her in the UK. USA law does not apply in the UK

But it applies to a US juvenile.

Why do you keep calling her a prostitute ?"

Perhaps because she shags for money. $500,000 from Epstein plus whatever from Andrew Windsor may have something to do with it

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *orkiebar51Man
over a year ago

Keighley


"Hes a paedo that's it disgraceful

No he isn't. Not even if he had sex with a 17 year old every day of his life.

He is not a paedophile.

Given he allegedly had sex with a young woman who was under the legal age of consent (based on the country the alleged act took place) but post puberty then I guess ephebophilia / an ephebophile would be the most appropriate term for Andrew.

Feels like he has bought his way out of it though.

Hopefully the public won't forget and will push bsck against any future rehabilitation of aandrews name.

KJ

If we are looking for terms i'd put him in the teleiophile ( full grown woman ) category.

If I can use my own words instead of a Greek accurate I'd say .... Ignorant, Narcissistic, Privileged , Entitled cunt of a Mummy's boy.

I thought a teleiophile referred to the following -

"A person who is attracted primarily to mature adults"

"An adolescent or young adult who is sexually attracted only to mature adults; someone who wishes for age disparity in the relationship, usually in favor of a young female and older male. This differs from Gerontophilia"

Given that she was only 17 at the time so not an adult in the eyes of most countries, still a teenager and under the legal age for consentual sex (18 in the location it took place) I genuinely can't see how you could class Andrew as a teleiophile?

Totally agree with all of your 2nd paragraph though. "

16 is the age of consent in UK

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *asycouple1971Couple
over a year ago

midlands

Hes a peado. End of.

Used and abused a child. No different from Jimmy saville, Gary Glitter and Rolf Harris.

Duke of Nonce

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ucka39Man
over a year ago

Newcastle

Regardless it's the worst scandal in royal history

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ranny-CrumpetWoman
over a year ago

The Town by The Cross


"Hes a paedo that's it disgraceful

No he isn't. Not even if he had sex with a 17 year old every day of his life.

He is not a paedophile.

Given he allegedly had sex with a young woman who was under the legal age of consent (based on the country the alleged act took place) but post puberty then I guess ephebophilia / an ephebophile would be the most appropriate term for Andrew.

Feels like he has bought his way out of it though.

Hopefully the public won't forget and will push bsck against any future rehabilitation of aandrews name.

KJ

If we are looking for terms i'd put him in the teleiophile ( full grown woman ) category.

If I can use my own words instead of a Greek accurate I'd say .... Ignorant, Narcissistic, Privileged , Entitled cunt of a Mummy's boy.

I thought a teleiophile referred to the following -

"A person who is attracted primarily to mature adults"

"An adolescent or young adult who is sexually attracted only to mature adults; someone who wishes for age disparity in the relationship, usually in favor of a young female and older male. This differs from Gerontophilia"

Given that she was only 17 at the time so not an adult in the eyes of most countries, still a teenager and under the legal age for consentual sex (18 in the location it took place) I genuinely can't see how you could class Andrew as a teleiophile?

Totally agree with all of your 2nd paragraph though. "

I don't make these classifications up .......... Anyone over the age of 16 e.g 17 if supposedly a full grown adult of their gender..... no one is talking experienced here. Just age.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *immyinreadingMan
over a year ago

henley on thames


"I really really don't like the guy at all, but I don't believe he slept with her against her will. The girl in question wanted to sleep with him so she could say she had slept with a prince.

She got $500000 from Epstein and now £12 million from the Royals. I think all of that £12million should go to charities not a gold digging girl.

The world has gone mad"

The world has gone mad? If so, it wasn’t a recent turn of events. It always was mad.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *immyinreadingMan
over a year ago

henley on thames


"Since it's a payout the amount will come out for tax purposes some how

Very very unlikely.

Anything is possible no body expected she would accept the offer things get leaked and people are most likely on it already as we speak

Publishing details of a settlement agreement is illegal.

I never mentioned being published things get leaked same as the phoning hacking "

Ok I will rephrase. If anyone reveals the details of the agreement, in any way; they would be breaking the law.

Someone and said it would “come out” “for tax purposes”. No it won’t

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *immyinreadingMan
over a year ago

henley on thames


"I really really don't like the guy at all, but I don't believe he slept with her against her will. The girl in question wanted to sleep with him so she could say she had slept with a prince.

She got $500000 from Epstein and now £12 million from the Royals. I think all of that £12million should go to charities not a gold digging girl.

The world has gone mad

News papers always tell the truth they say what they like as a story which people run to buy and start believing everything "

Which bit of what had been published by newspapers are you saying that you don’t believe?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

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


"Regardless it's the worst scandal in royal history"

Recent royal history you mean, as there have been many beheadings of royals throughout history

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *entlemanrogueMan
over a year ago

Motherwell

They should give him the noose along with the rest of them.

£12m of tax payers mo ey is no punishment at all, the fact i have contributed even 1p to this is a discgrace.

Kick him and the rest of them out.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *immyinreadingMan
over a year ago

henley on thames


"Hes a peado. End of.

Used and abused a child. No different from Jimmy saville, Gary Glitter and Rolf Harris.

Duke of Nonce"

Careful! Not sure it is legal for you to openly state that.

Wasn’t she 17? Over Uk age of consent?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *immyinreadingMan
over a year ago

henley on thames


"Regardless it's the worst scandal in royal history"

Really? Worse than a bloke having his wife’s head chopped off so he could marry again?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *immyinreadingMan
over a year ago

henley on thames


"Regardless it's the worst scandal in royal history

Recent royal history you mean, as there have been many beheadings of royals throughout history "

The worst since Hello magazine came into circulation ...

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ucka39Man
over a year ago

Newcastle


"Since it's a payout the amount will come out for tax purposes some how

Very very unlikely.

Anything is possible no body expected she would accept the offer things get leaked and people are most likely on it already as we speak

Publishing details of a settlement agreement is illegal.

I never mentioned being published things get leaked same as the phoning hacking

Ok I will rephrase. If anyone reveals the details of the agreement, in any way; they would be breaking the law.

Someone and said it would “come out” “for tax purposes”. No it won’t "

But you or I have nothing to back this up and whether it is breaking the law or not things seem to just pop up then an investigation of how..... Why does everyone think it's 12 million when it's undisclosed Karen

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *immyinreadingMan
over a year ago

henley on thames


"They should give him the noose along with the rest of them.

£12m of tax payers mo ey is no punishment at all, the fact i have contributed even 1p to this is a discgrace.

Kick him and the rest of them out."

The payment is being funded by the tax payers? I thought it more likely to be funded from the vast sums of money that the royals already have stashed away. If it is being funded by the tax payer please let me know your source for that info. Thanks

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

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

What with Charles’ charity being criminally investigated it’s a good job the queen never thought to publish a parenting book

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ucka39Man
over a year ago

Newcastle


"Regardless it's the worst scandal in royal history

Recent royal history you mean, as there have been many beheadings of royals throughout history

The worst since Hello magazine came into circulation ... "

The worst since the late deceased Diana tinfoil

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

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


"Since it's a payout the amount will come out for tax purposes some how

Very very unlikely.

Anything is possible no body expected she would accept the offer things get leaked and people are most likely on it already as we speak

Publishing details of a settlement agreement is illegal.

I never mentioned being published things get leaked same as the phoning hacking

Ok I will rephrase. If anyone reveals the details of the agreement, in any way; they would be breaking the law.

Someone and said it would “come out” “for tax purposes”. No it won’t

But you or I have nothing to back this up and whether it is breaking the law or not things seem to just pop up then an investigation of how..... Why does everyone think it's 12 million when it's undisclosed Karen "

Probably FB news

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *immyinreadingMan
over a year ago

henley on thames


"Since it's a payout the amount will come out for tax purposes some how

Very very unlikely.

Anything is possible no body expected she would accept the offer things get leaked and people are most likely on it already as we speak

Publishing details of a settlement agreement is illegal.

I never mentioned being published things get leaked same as the phoning hacking

Ok I will rephrase. If anyone reveals the details of the agreement, in any way; they would be breaking the law.

Someone and said it would “come out” “for tax purposes”. No it won’t

But you or I have nothing to back this up and whether it is breaking the law or not things seem to just pop up then an investigation of how..... Why does everyone think it's 12 million when it's undisclosed Karen "

I don’t know where the 12m figure came from , or the 10m figure that some other media are using. Both are clearly guesses, as the amount would be in dollars anyway.

But I do know that if anyone reveals the actual figure or terms of the agreement, they are breaking the law.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *immyinreadingMan
over a year ago

henley on thames


"Regardless it's the worst scandal in royal history

Recent royal history you mean, as there have been many beheadings of royals throughout history

The worst since Hello magazine came into circulation ...

The worst since the late deceased Diana tinfoil"

Fair point. Unlikely then to be the worst case in royal history, as had been suggested.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ucka39Man
over a year ago

Newcastle


"Since it's a payout the amount will come out for tax purposes some how

Very very unlikely.

Anything is possible no body expected she would accept the offer things get leaked and people are most likely on it already as we speak

Publishing details of a settlement agreement is illegal.

I never mentioned being published things get leaked same as the phoning hacking

Ok I will rephrase. If anyone reveals the details of the agreement, in any way; they would be breaking the law.

Someone and said it would “come out” “for tax purposes”. No it won’t

But you or I have nothing to back this up and whether it is breaking the law or not things seem to just pop up then an investigation of how..... Why does everyone think it's 12 million when it's undisclosed Karen

Probably FB news "

Even the general news doesn't even have this information so be quick you might get a payment

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *entlemanrogueMan
over a year ago

Motherwell

it is stated as £12m in a few places online MsM so probably BS

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *entlemanrogueMan
over a year ago

Motherwell


"They should give him the noose along with the rest of them.

£12m of tax payers mo ey is no punishment at all, the fact i have contributed even 1p to this is a discgrace.

Kick him and the rest of them out.

The payment is being funded by the tax payers? I thought it more likely to be funded from the vast sums of money that the royals already have stashed away. If it is being funded by the tax payer please let me know your source for that info. Thanks "

The Royals are funded by the tax payer for god sake.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ucka39Man
over a year ago

Newcastle

Don't suppose anyone knows the lottery winning numbers for tonight

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ucka39Man
over a year ago

Newcastle


"They should give him the noose along with the rest of them.

£12m of tax payers mo ey is no punishment at all, the fact i have contributed even 1p to this is a discgrace.

Kick him and the rest of them out.

The payment is being funded by the tax payers? I thought it more likely to be funded from the vast sums of money that the royals already have stashed away. If it is being funded by the tax payer please let me know your source for that info. Thanks

The Royals are funded by the tax payer for god sake."

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *9alMan
over a year ago

Bridgend


"Regardless it's the worst scandal in royal history

Really? Worse than a bloke having his wife’s head chopped off so he could marry again? "

poor old Henry could not arrange a car accident ?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ucka39Man
over a year ago

Newcastle


"Regardless it's the worst scandal in royal history

Really? Worse than a bloke having his wife’s head chopped off so he could marry again?

poor old Henry could not arrange a car accident ? "

Nope but I'm sure his military father James could teach him a trick or two

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *immyinreadingMan
over a year ago

henley on thames


"it is stated as £12m in a few places online MsM so probably BS"

That figure also seems to be an estimate of the total costs (including legal costs), rather than the amount of the settlement.

Not sure I understand the msm jibe ... you have a better more reliable source do you?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ucka39Man
over a year ago

Newcastle

The royalties property isn't all owned by them some is owned by the public sector and them were just the ones who pay tax on it

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *immyinreadingMan
over a year ago

henley on thames


"The royalties property isn't all owned by them some is owned by the public sector and them were just the ones who pay tax on it "

I’m confused ... can this try that one again please?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *entlemanrogueMan
over a year ago

Motherwell

[Removed by poster at 16/02/22 16:00:21]

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *entlemanrogueMan
over a year ago

Motherwell


"it is stated as £12m in a few places online MsM so probably BS

That figure also seems to be an estimate of the total costs (including legal costs), rather than the amount of the settlement.

Not sure I understand the msm jibe ... you have a better more reliable source do you? "

You believe everything the MsM tells you?

OK then x

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ucka39Man
over a year ago

Newcastle


"The royalties property isn't all owned by them some is owned by the public sector and them were just the ones who pay tax on it

I’m confused ... can this try that one again please? "

Please don't feel confused the law of the land

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *uksungCouple
over a year ago

wednesbury

He wouldn't get a fair trial in the U.S. its to left wing. He has already been found guilty by the press.

I won't be popular but think it was wrong to take his titles and stuff before he was found guilty. If he is found guilty throw the book at him but of he's not does he get everything back. Trial by pres is wrong.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *immyinreadingMan
over a year ago

henley on thames


"it is stated as £12m in a few places online MsM so probably BS

That figure also seems to be an estimate of the total costs (including legal costs), rather than the amount of the settlement.

Not sure I understand the msm jibe ... you have a better more reliable source do you?

You believe everything the MsM tells you?

OK then x

"

Did I say I believe everything msm tells me? No. I use multiple sources plus my own judgment , but the more reliable msm sources have proved the best over time.

I see that you ignored my question re better sources. If you have better more reliable sources than msm, please share.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *immyinreadingMan
over a year ago

henley on thames


"The royalties property isn't all owned by them some is owned by the public sector and them were just the ones who pay tax on it

I’m confused ... can this try that one again please?

Please don't feel confused the law of the land "

Apologies. I just couldn’t figure out what it was you were trying to convey.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *entlemanrogueMan
over a year ago

Motherwell


"it is stated as £12m in a few places online MsM so probably BS

That figure also seems to be an estimate of the total costs (including legal costs), rather than the amount of the settlement.

Not sure I understand the msm jibe ... you have a better more reliable source do you?

You believe everything the MsM tells you?

OK then x

Did I say I believe everything msm tells me? No. I use multiple sources plus my own judgment , but the more reliable msm sources have proved the best over time.

I see that you ignored my question re better sources. If you have better more reliable sources than msm, please share. "

Which reliable Msm sources are these?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *immyinreadingMan
over a year ago

henley on thames


"He wouldn't get a fair trial in the U.S. its to left wing. He has already been found guilty by the press.

I won't be popular but think it was wrong to take his titles and stuff before he was found guilty. If he is found guilty throw the book at him but of he's not does he get everything back. Trial by pres is wrong."

You think the US is more left win than here?

Having lived in both countries (and come from a third one), that is not my experience. The level of state support etc that all parties here are comfortable with would be seen as close to communism in the US.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *entlemanrogueMan
over a year ago

Motherwell


"The royalties property isn't all owned by them some is owned by the public sector and them were just the ones who pay tax on it

I’m confused ... can this try that one again please?

Please don't feel confused the law of the land

Apologies. I just couldn’t figure out what it was you were trying to convey. "

Seeing the item discussed for myself, either in realife or by video. using my brain to see what the MSM agenda may be and who is benefitting.

I gave up on tv w few years ago and will never pay the BBC tv tac again, as for newspapers..

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *immyinreadingMan
over a year ago

henley on thames


"it is stated as £12m in a few places online MsM so probably BS

That figure also seems to be an estimate of the total costs (including legal costs), rather than the amount of the settlement.

Not sure I understand the msm jibe ... you have a better more reliable source do you?

You believe everything the MsM tells you?

OK then x

Did I say I believe everything msm tells me? No. I use multiple sources plus my own judgment , but the more reliable msm sources have proved the best over time.

I see that you ignored my question re better sources. If you have better more reliable sources than msm, please share.

Which reliable Msm sources are these?

"

Another deflection! Hilarious! Be honest, you’ve got nothing have you, just attack “MSM”, but can’t offer a better, more reliable alternative.

I’ll give you one provider. The Irish Times. Brilliant journalism, excellent reputation, robust editorials, and outsiders view of the US and UK.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ucka39Man
over a year ago

Newcastle


"He wouldn't get a fair trial in the U.S. its to left wing. He has already been found guilty by the press.

I won't be popular but think it was wrong to take his titles and stuff before he was found guilty. If he is found guilty throw the book at him but of he's not does he get everything back. Trial by pres is wrong."

Knowing that he was hanging around with a convicted sex offender who has served a sentence and admitted his crime is also a very good choice as the interview goes he stayed several nights and yes was ok his own words but he learned something don't get caught

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *entlemanrogueMan
over a year ago

Motherwell


"it is stated as £12m in a few places online MsM so probably BS

That figure also seems to be an estimate of the total costs (including legal costs), rather than the amount of the settlement.

Not sure I understand the msm jibe ... you have a better more reliable source do you?

You believe everything the MsM tells you?

OK then x

Did I say I believe everything msm tells me? No. I use multiple sources plus my own judgment , but the more reliable msm sources have proved the best over time.

I see that you ignored my question re better sources. If you have better more reliable sources than msm, please share.

Which reliable Msm sources are these?

Another deflection! Hilarious! Be honest, you’ve got nothing have you, just attack “MSM”, but can’t offer a better, more reliable alternative.

I’ll give you one provider. The Irish Times. Brilliant journalism, excellent reputation, robust editorials, and outsiders view of the US and UK. "

How rude, no it isnt a deflection.

i grew up reading Bs in papers and watching Bs on the news so much so i have long quit MsM oher than for sports chat, unfortuenatley i am still subjected to their crap via family, friends and colleagues

I have never read the irish times, why would I, I dont live there.

What about UK based MsM sources tbat are reliable.

challenge, list 3.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *entlemanrogueMan
over a year ago

Motherwell


"He wouldn't get a fair trial in the U.S. its to left wing. He has already been found guilty by the press.

I won't be popular but think it was wrong to take his titles and stuff before he was found guilty. If he is found guilty throw the book at him but of he's not does he get everything back. Trial by pres is wrong.

Knowing that he was hanging around with a convicted sex offender who has served a sentence and admitted his crime is also a very good choice as the interview goes he stayed several nights and yes was ok his own words but he learned something don't get caught "

Royals whos friends included Saville and Harris... hmmmm. seems to be a pattern here

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *enny PR9TV/TS
over a year ago

Southport


"He wouldn't get a fair trial in the U.S. its to left wing. He has already been found guilty by the press.

I won't be popular but think it was wrong to take his titles and stuff before he was found guilty. If he is found guilty throw the book at him but of he's not does he get everything back. Trial by pres is wrong."

I quite agree trial by press is wrong. I mean you shag one sheep and the press never let you forget it.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ucka39Man
over a year ago

Newcastle


"He wouldn't get a fair trial in the U.S. its to left wing. He has already been found guilty by the press.

I won't be popular but think it was wrong to take his titles and stuff before he was found guilty. If he is found guilty throw the book at him but of he's not does he get everything back. Trial by pres is wrong.

Knowing that he was hanging around with a convicted sex offender who has served a sentence and admitted his crime is also a very good choice as the interview goes he stayed several nights and yes was ok his own words but he learned something don't get caught

Royals whos friends included Saville and Harris... hmmmm. seems to be a pattern here"

Exactly and he doesn't sweat or go to parties yet everyone has pointed out the sum of money and it's not even been paid yet

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ovebjsMan
over a year ago

Bristol


"He wouldn't get a fair trial in the U.S. its to left wing. He has already been found guilty by the press.

I won't be popular but think it was wrong to take his titles and stuff before he was found guilty. If he is found guilty throw the book at him but of he's not does he get everything back. Trial by pres is wrong.

Knowing that he was hanging around with a convicted sex offender who has served a sentence and admitted his crime is also a very good choice as the interview goes he stayed several nights and yes was ok his own words but he learned something don't get caught

Royals whos friends included Saville and Harris... hmmmm. seems to be a pattern here

Exactly and he doesn't sweat or go to parties yet everyone has pointed out the sum of money and it's not even been paid yet "

And nobody really know the amount or the split between what she gets and her charity gets

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *immyinreadingMan
over a year ago

henley on thames


"it is stated as £12m in a few places online MsM so probably BS

That figure also seems to be an estimate of the total costs (including legal costs), rather than the amount of the settlement.

Not sure I understand the msm jibe ... you have a better more reliable source do you?

You believe everything the MsM tells you?

OK then x

Did I say I believe everything msm tells me? No. I use multiple sources plus my own judgment , but the more reliable msm sources have proved the best over time.

I see that you ignored my question re better sources. If you have better more reliable sources than msm, please share.

Which reliable Msm sources are these?

Another deflection! Hilarious! Be honest, you’ve got nothing have you, just attack “MSM”, but can’t offer a better, more reliable alternative.

I’ll give you one provider. The Irish Times. Brilliant journalism, excellent reputation, robust editorials, and outsiders view of the US and UK.

How rude, no it isnt a deflection.

i grew up reading Bs in papers and watching Bs on the news so much so i have long quit MsM oher than for sports chat, unfortuenatley i am still subjected to their crap via family, friends and colleagues

I have never read the irish times, why would I, I dont live there.

What about UK based MsM sources tbat are reliable.

challenge, list 3.

"

I never suggested you should read the Irish times. You asked me for a reliable man source and I gave one.

I asked several times for you to provide alternative , better, non-MSM sources and you keep ducking the question. That tells me all I need to know.

Is MSM perfect? No.

Do I believe everything I read in MSM? No.

Do I know of a better source? No.

So MSM is the best of a bad lot ... qualified, named journalists who are accountable for what they produce and on the hook if it proves to be wrong (retractions / apologies / being sued all dent confidence). Proper robust journalism, worth paying for.

What are your sources? Or are you going to deflect again?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 
 

By *akie32 OP   Man
over a year ago

winchester

i do find it a bit suspisious that she settled as the origonal picture couldnt be found, just copies?

Do i think they had sex, yes probably, it was in the uk so perfectly legal.

was he stuipid very much so.

settling out of court was the best outcome for them both, she gets some money, her charity gets some money and thats it.

i dought tho that this is the last of it, and i wander who else will come out of the woodwork wanting a payday.

Im pleased hes been stripped of his titles, right or wrong hes smeared the royal family at a time when they least need it, charles must be furious, he just wanted to take over when his mum dies and be king, but im not sure the royal family will survive this, and that makes me sad, one of the last great institutions.

and for those saying that our tax is paying for the payout, do some reading, the royal family actually make the uk far more than they recieve, and thats before you take into acount all the deals done off the back of them visiting other countries.

im not particualy a royalinst, but this episode aside i do believe the do more for us than we realise and if you want them gone be careful what you wish for as it may well happen.

arise president tony, god forbid

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
back to top