sadoldgit Posted 23 January, 2015 Posted 23 January, 2015 Says he has done nothing wrong. That's okay then.
TwoPints Posted 23 January, 2015 Posted 23 January, 2015 Yep, nothing to see here. If Andy says he's in the clear, who am I to argue. I can't imagine that anyone with money and power would wish to do such a thing anyway.
sadoldgit Posted 23 January, 2015 Author Posted 23 January, 2015 He is hardly likely to say yep, it is a fair kop. I am guilty as charged. What I find funny is that his ex wife, who was caught out "at it" when married to HRH is coming out saying her ex hubby is totally innocent of all wrong doing. They all seem to think they are immune to public scrutiny. We pay for these people and they are accountable for their behaviour. In the good old days we could remove their heads from their shoulders.
hutch Posted 23 January, 2015 Posted 23 January, 2015 Has he actually been accused of breaking any law? His private life is his private life. He should not be made available, on demand, to assist people with their own civil damages lawsuits for compensation. If anybody brought any criminal charges against him I expect they would be answered.
Batman Posted 23 January, 2015 Posted 23 January, 2015 He is hardly likely to say yep, it is a fair kop. I am guilty as charged. What I find funny is that his ex wife, who was caught out "at it" when married to HRH is coming out saying her ex hubby is totally innocent of all wrong doing. They all seem to think they are immune to public scrutiny. We pay for these people and they are accountable for their behaviour. In the good old days we could remove their heads from their shoulders. Now you listen to tittle tattle Not like the ched evens case, eh?
Saintandy666 Posted 23 January, 2015 Posted 23 January, 2015 Has he actually been accused of breaking any law? His private life is his private life. He should not be made available, on demand, to assist people with their own civil damages lawsuits for compensation. If anybody brought any criminal charges against him I expect they would be answered. What he has alleged to have done would be a break of the law as I understand of a couple of levels. Firstly, she is a minor at 17 (age of consent in US is 18), and secondly she was alleged to have been part of a sex ring which had Epstein at its centre and was as part of that coerced (read raped) to have sex with multiple men. So the allegations are more serious than 'private life'.
hutch Posted 23 January, 2015 Posted 23 January, 2015 What he has alleged to have done would be a break of the law as I understand of a couple of levels. Firstly, she is a minor at 17 (age of consent in US is 18), and secondly she was alleged to have been part of a sex ring which had Epstein at its centre and was as part of that coerced (read raped) to have sex with multiple men. So the allegations are more serious than 'private life'. None of that is true, of course. But it makes a good story.
Saintandy666 Posted 23 January, 2015 Posted 23 January, 2015 None of that is true, of course. But it makes a good story. I said 'alleged', and indeed, as ever 'innocent until proven guilty'.
sadoldgit Posted 23 January, 2015 Author Posted 23 January, 2015 (edited) Now you listen to tittle tattle Not like the ched evens case, eh? Lighten up dude. The Royals are fair game. I don't think I have laughed so much as when we heard that Charles (our future King god help us) wanted to be a tampon so he could be closer to Camilla! This whist married to someone else. Still, they are Royal so above reproach eh? Edited 23 January, 2015 by sadoldgit
hutch Posted 23 January, 2015 Posted 23 January, 2015 I said 'alleged', and indeed, as ever 'innocent until proven guilty'. No you didn't. You said categorically, not allegedly, that she was a minor at 17 because the age of consent in the US is 18. That isn't true.
sadoldgit Posted 23 January, 2015 Author Posted 23 January, 2015 Apparently they have found a post script for the original Magna Carter. It says that all of the above are agree as long as members of the Royal Family can continue to sh@g around with impunity for as long as the monarchy stands.
Saintandy666 Posted 23 January, 2015 Posted 23 January, 2015 No you didn't. You said categorically, not allegedly, that she was a minor at 17 because the age of consent in the US is 18. That isn't true. Incorrect - the papers have been filed in Florida (where I presume it is alleged to have occured). In Florida, the age of consent is 18 (although it varies by US state)- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_North_America#Florida
hutch Posted 23 January, 2015 Posted 23 January, 2015 Florida isn't the US. The allegation is that he had sex with her in New York.
Saintandy666 Posted 23 January, 2015 Posted 23 January, 2015 Florida isn't the US. The allegation is that he had sex with her in New York. In which case the entire press have been reporting it incorrectly by saying 'sex with a minor'. Although just as serious in the coercion allegation via sex ring.
norwaysaint Posted 23 January, 2015 Posted 23 January, 2015 Incorrect - the papers have been filed in Florida (where I presume it is alleged to have occured). In Florida, the age of consent is 18 (although it varies by US state)- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_North_America#Florida Following that link I see that the age of consent in Mexico is 12. That's a bit of a shocker.
hutch Posted 23 January, 2015 Posted 23 January, 2015 In which case the entire press have been reporting it incorrectly by saying 'sex with a minor'. Although just as serious in the coercion allegation via sex ring. Maybe so but there is no allegation that HRH was a part of any ring, just that he may have benefitted. This is a civil case, not criminal. There are no criminal charges against anybody. It is a transparent attempt to get a financial settlement by putting pressure on famous people. I'm no royalist, but I hope in this instance that the royal machine gives it short shrift.
sadoldgit Posted 23 January, 2015 Author Posted 23 January, 2015 Now you listen to tittle tattle Not like the ched evens case, eh? HRH is accused of being involved in a sex ring. Hardly "tittle tattle" is it?
Lighthouse Posted 23 January, 2015 Posted 23 January, 2015 Following that link I see that the age of consent in Mexico is 12. That's a bit of a shocker. Imagine being a Mexican paedo. "She told me she was 12!"
Batman Posted 23 January, 2015 Posted 23 January, 2015 HRH is accused of being involved in a sex ring. Hardly "tittle tattle" is it? He is innocent. until proven guilty best not suggest he is guilty, the law says he is innocent. or something like that
Killers Knee Posted 23 January, 2015 Posted 23 January, 2015 Little chance of the establishment paedophile ring being investigated then
sadoldgit Posted 23 January, 2015 Author Posted 23 January, 2015 He is innocent. until proven guilty best not suggest he is guilty, the law says he is innocent. or something like that Indeed and we wont know either way until the matter has been investigated properly. But as I say, hardly "tittle tattle." And not the best choice of friends by HRH is it given that we know his pal has been found guilty previously.
CB Saint Posted 23 January, 2015 Posted 23 January, 2015 In which case the entire press have been reporting it incorrectly by saying 'sex with a minor'. Although just as serious in the coercion allegation via sex ring. "sex with a minor" is a much more sensational headline than "sex with a women who would have been a minor if he kn0bbed her in Florida" - uses less ink as well Not that the papers ever get it wrong -
badgerx16 Posted 23 January, 2015 Posted 23 January, 2015 Following that link I see that the age of consent in Mexico is 12. That's a bit of a shocker. The Vatican City only recently raised it's age of consent to 18 from 12.
badgerx16 Posted 23 January, 2015 Posted 23 January, 2015 Florida isn't the US. The allegation is that he had sex with her in New York. I thought there was also the allegation that it had happened on his mate's private island, which does fall within the jurisdiction of Florida.
hutch Posted 23 January, 2015 Posted 23 January, 2015 There might be, but that wouldn't be true either. The Virgin Islands has it's own legal system and it's own Courts. The age of consent is 16.
Unbelievable Jeff Posted 23 January, 2015 Posted 23 January, 2015 In which case the entire press have been reporting it incorrectly by saying 'sex with a minor'. Although just as serious in the coercion allegation via sex ring. I don't think they have been. Most of the press has said having sex with a 17 year old? Or they certainly did on 5live last night.
Unbelievable Jeff Posted 23 January, 2015 Posted 23 January, 2015 Imagine being a Mexican paedo. "She told me she was 12!" I'm going to hell for laughing at that...
FloridaMarlin Posted 23 January, 2015 Posted 23 January, 2015 I'm sure the royal family would be even more disturbed if he had sex with a miner. How frightfully working class.
Saintandy666 Posted 23 January, 2015 Posted 23 January, 2015 I don't think they have been. Most of the press has said having sex with a 17 year old? Or they certainly did on 5live last night. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30927287 'She alleges she was forced by financier Jeffrey Epstein to have sex with the prince when she was a minor in the US.' - 2 days ago on the BBC.
Wade Garrett Posted 23 January, 2015 Posted 23 January, 2015 Little chance of the establishment paedophile ring being investigated then Massive failing by the Government. Absolutely scandalous, typical establishment, protecting themselves.
Lighthouse Posted 23 January, 2015 Posted 23 January, 2015 I'm sure the royal family would be even more disturbed if he had sex with a miner. How frightfully working class. It's tough being a dyslexic paedo.
bridge too far Posted 23 January, 2015 Posted 23 January, 2015 Massive failing by the Government. Absolutely scandalous, typical establishment, protecting themselves. If I were a conspiracy theorist, which I'm not, I would wonder if the delay in setting up the Child Abuse enquiry was deliberate in that they knew Leon Brittan was about to shuffle off this mortal coil and with it his evidence / cross-examination
Picard Posted 23 January, 2015 Posted 23 January, 2015 If I were a conspiracy theorist, which I'm not, I would wonder if the delay in setting up the Child Abuse enquiry was deliberate in that they knew Leon Brittan was about to shuffle off this mortal coil and with it his evidence / cross-examination Is he really dead?
trousers Posted 23 January, 2015 Posted 23 January, 2015 If I were a conspiracy theorist, which I'm not, Hey, get your own catchphrase! Whatever next? Posting stills from Hollywood fantasy comedy movies?
buctootim Posted 23 January, 2015 Posted 23 January, 2015 Hey, get your own catchphrase! Whatever next? Posting clips from Tory fantasy comedy movies?
Patrick Bateman Posted 23 January, 2015 Posted 23 January, 2015 If I were a conspiracy theorist, which I'm not, I would wonder if the delay in setting up the Child Abuse enquiry was deliberate in that they knew Leon Brittan was about to shuffle off this mortal coil and with it his evidence / cross-examination Absolutely. Something stinks, properly, really, horrendously stinks and it'll keep stinking for years until after they've (whoever 'they' are) have all done one from this Earth. Unfortunately.
Kingsbridge Saint Posted 24 January, 2015 Posted 24 January, 2015 (edited) Raping 2 year olds or drunk sex with a 17 year old. Massive difference. Read the mainstream and you wouldn't think so. It's a black and white thing for them - you are either a rapist/paedophile or you are not. Ask Ched or Graham Rix. It's all a matter of scale. For me, kill the former without mercy and have some balance about the latter. It's not hard, it ****es me off the way it's all reported. Edited 24 January, 2015 by Kingsbridge Saint
CB Fry Posted 24 January, 2015 Posted 24 January, 2015 Raping 2 year olds or drunk sex with a 17 year old. Massive difference. Read the mainstream and you wouldn't think so. It's a black and white thing for them - you are either a rapist/paedophile or you are not. Ask Ched or Graham Rix. It's all a matter of scale. For me, kill the former without mercy and have some balance about the latter. It's not hard, it ****es me off the way it's all reported. Are you saying Prince Andrew is getting the same type of coverage as Ian Watkins? Your post is far more black and white (in fact, just wrong) than anything you are complaining about.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now