The Royal Family Discussion Thread

[Bargepole23]

14 hours ago, West 77 said:

You do know this is a civil case?  You do know that nobody in the UK can be extradited to a foreign country to answer a civil case?

 

Everyone including Prince Andrew is innocent until proven guilty.   A civil case is not the same as a criminal case which is why the media and people can get away with making all sorts of comments and assumptions to discredit an individual.

I do. I said he has a case to answer. You then decided to explain what I already fully understood.

[Bargepole23]

9 hours ago, ECCOnoob said:

....... a "young girl" who was well over the legal age of consent in most countries around the world at the time the photograph of taken. A photograph which hardly displays a image of someone being there by way of fear, enforcement, entrapment or reluctance.  A young girl who was previously caught out giving dubious evidence on other similar cases. A young girl who is clearly chasing the money more than prepared to sign big fat non disclosure settlement agreements rather than getting to the truth. A young girl who is a master in manipulating the media for her next compensatory payout from easy high profile targets.  A young girl who has not provided a single shred of any credible evidence to these allegations.

 

This is a civil compensatory claim. Let's get that simple fact out there.  Let's all stop with this ridiculous notion that there is some book to be thrown or some jail cell just waiting or PC Plod around the corner ready to charge in to arrest him.  

 

She's after nothing more than a big fat cheque.

You know nothing of the facts other than those available in the media, and have judged this young woman as a money grabber, Who knows what duress she was placed under to sign whatever she signed. Wouldn't be the first time that the innocent have been coerced into signing something accepting something they didn't do. 

13 hours ago, Anna B said:

Guilty or not, the damage has been done. 

 Even if he manages to dodge a trial / hearing, a cloud will always hang over his head, not least because he failed to  cooperate with the Americans, and that disasterous interview.

I very much doubt he will ever be able to return to public duties.

Will we notice the difference?

[Baron99]

Surely, a totally innocent individual would relish their day in court (with their legal representatives), to take down their accuser? 

 

However, someone who decides to pay off their accuser, runs the risk of being permanently tarnished & would continue to have the finger pointed at them & by the action of paying off the accuser, could hardly defend the allegation that they weren't guilty of a crime in the first place. 

 

Let's face it.  Nobody is going to see Prince Andrew standing up in the dock in a US courtroom. 

[ECCOnoob]

1 hour ago, Bargepole23 said:

You know nothing of the facts other than those available in the media, and have judged this young woman as a money grabber, Who knows what duress she was placed under to sign whatever she signed. Wouldn't be the first time that the innocent have been coerced into signing something accepting something they didn't do. 

Will we notice the difference?

and?   everyone seems more than happy to make sweeping, judgemental, uncorroborated statements about the Prince based on no facts and media speculation - why shouldn't I be able to apply the same to this woman.

 

I doubt very much that she was under any sort of duress to sign a settlement agreement. At the time she was in a court of law surrounded by her team of lawyers. She has been more than happy to become the professional victim, whoring herself around any media outlet that will pay her and bringing further actions against other high-profile targets.

 

Hardly some frightened, timid, manipulated  little girl acting under duress.

Edited January 13, 2022 by ECCOnoob

[harvey19]

If someone has done something wrong they are punished by the law and receive  a sentence.

Why then is a civil case being brought ?

 

[PRESLEY]

Lets get this straight to all the deluded royalist on this forum,  the royals over the years have been guilty of plenty of crimes,  hushed up and swept under  giant carpets in buck house ect,  I would not like to be one of the cleaners trying to run an hoover over them.  THEY ARE ABOVE THE LAW,  thats why they don't get the same treatment as the rest of us.  Like it or lump that is the TRUTH about this lot.  

[Cyclecar]

This is a sordid, salacious debacle. HRHTDOY is not very bright (not the only one in "The Firm"...), and he has lived a life of magnificent privelege where his every wish has been granted, and none of his actions questioned. Accordingly, he has surrounded himself with yes men who only tell him what he wants to hear. Hence this mess. 

 

It will inevitably end in a settlement. In US civil cases, each side bear their own legal costs. HRH has run up a huge bill so far, and "The Firm" have left him in no doubt that it's his tab. HMTQ won't sell off a couple of Rembrandts to straighten him out. And he has run out of chums, as he is no longer a person of influence who can make introductions. His lead wig alone (and there's a full team plus reserves) charges £1k/hour. Go figure. 

 

For the plaintiff's part, she has also run un up a hefty legal tab. This will be paid from the proceeds of the action, should she win. As the bill ratchets up, her team may push her to settle if only to ensure they get paid. Nothing in litigation is certain, only dollars. 

 

But you have to admire the faithful British media, on air or in print. Every twist and turn is gleefully analysed. The picture of HRH, the Plaintiff and Ms M is reprinted ad nauseum, the BBC interview with our Emily is repeated as though on a loop tape. In a couple of months we will have document disclosure where more titillating details will emerge. Rumours of a threeway will persist.  All good for circulation and viewing figures. 

 

Governorship of the Falklands beckons.  That will have the penguins running. 

[PRESLEY]

8 minutes ago, Cyclecar said:

This is a sordid, salacious debacle. HRHTDOY is not very bright (not the only one in "The Firm"...), and he has lived a life of magnificent privelege where his every wish has been granted, and none of his actions questioned. Accordingly, he has surrounded himself with yes men who only tell him what he wants to hear. Hence this mess. 

 

It will inevitably end in a settlement. In US civil cases, each side bear their own legal costs. HRH has run up a huge bill so far, and "The Firm" have left him in no doubt that it's his tab. HMTQ won't sell off a couple of Rembrandts to straighten him out. And he has run out of chums, as he is no longer a person of influence who can make introductions. His lead wig alone (and there's a full team plus reserves) charges £1k/hour. Go figure. 

 

For the plaintiff's part, she has also run un up a hefty legal tab. This will be paid from the proceeds of the action, should she win. As the bill ratchets up, her team may push her to settle if only to ensure they get paid. Nothing in litigation is certain, only dollars. 

 

But you have to admire the faithful British media, on air or in print. Every twist and turn is gleefully analysed. The picture of HRH, the Plaintiff and Ms M is reprinted ad nauseum, the BBC interview with our Emily is repeated as though on a loop tape. In a couple of months we will have document disclosure where more titillating details will emerge. Rumours of a threeway will persist.  All good for circulation and viewing figures. 

 

Governorship of the Falklands beckons.  That will have the penguins running. 

Great Post. 

[lobster]

2 Points

1) Andrew will have  Royal Protection Officer( s) .  They and the Police Logs at the time will be able to say where he was at the time of the alledged  trip to Woking Pizza Hut . The fact that he has not produced either is rather Damning

 

2) irrespective if Andrew is guilty or not ,he will not get a fair  trial in America . American Juries are notorious for finding in favour of Americans in any case against foreigners despite the evidence

[cgksheff]

I don't think that Andrew will risk the exposure of the case going ahead.
He will try and press for a financial settlement, but currently the plaintiff is being reported as wanting her day in court.
If she continues to turn down the offers, I think that she will win by default when Andrew fails to take part.