The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #3121  
Old 11-26-2019, 12:29 AM
Claire's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,001
I am not one to jump on the band wagon - I want to not judge people that I don't know or judge people by one event or several events. But I have always admired the way Andrew and Sarah have remained friends and have raised their daughters. And this was them - not the palace, nor Nannies or the Queen. Children are not their parents. Royals are people and people make mistakes. Sometimes big mistakes that rightly require a larger punishment. But lets not throw the baby out with the bathwater here.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #3122  
Old 11-26-2019, 01:08 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 14,674
Question. Haven't we lost the Epstein train of thought in the roundhouse and sent the locomotive down a different track?
__________________

__________________
No law can be sacred to me but that of my nature. Good and bad are but names very readily transferable to that or this; the only right is what is after my constitution, the only wrong what is against it.

~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
  #3123  
Old 11-26-2019, 01:36 AM
hel hel is offline
Courtier
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Kitchener, Canada
Posts: 660
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kataryn View Post
I really have difficulties reading this thread as I am astonished how many members are forgetting that in the Uk one rule is the basis of their criminal justice law: everyone is innocent until proven guilty.But what crime did Prinz Andrew commit that was proven?
Unless he's been jailed since I was out this evening, this discussion has nothing to do with the criminal justice system.

Innocent until proven guilty is a legal standard. If he'd been jailed, I'd be right there on the barricades with you. But no-one in this forum has the ability to jail Andrew, and everyone on this forum has the right to their opinion without it being dismissed because it doesn't adhere to a standard that doesn't apply.

Andrew has faced no legal consequences whatsoever. There's nothing protecting any of us from social consequences when we act poorly or, as with Andrew, when we come across as a dishonest and insensitive boor.
Reply With Quote
  #3124  
Old 11-26-2019, 02:44 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Somewhere in, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,184
Quote:
Originally Posted by hel View Post
Unless he's been jailed since I was out this evening, this discussion has nothing to do with the criminal justice system.

Innocent until proven guilty is a legal standard. If he'd been jailed, I'd be right there on the barricades with you. But no-one in this forum has the ability to jail Andrew, and everyone on this forum has the right to their opinion without it being dismissed because it doesn't adhere to a standard that doesn't apply.

Andrew has faced no legal consequences whatsoever. There's nothing protecting any of us from social consequences when we act poorly or, as with Andrew, when we come across as a dishonest and insensitive boor.
Thank you for saying this. I've been scratching my head trying to figure out why Andrew shouldn't be judged for his friendship with a convicted sex trafficker. He's not facing any legal consequences, only moral ones, which he wouldn't even be facing, had he not given that unsympathetic, horrid interview.
Reply With Quote
  #3125  
Old 11-26-2019, 03:17 AM
O-H Anglophile's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 3,640
Quote:
Originally Posted by sndral View Post
IMO the Yorks have a very unhealthy family dynamic - they do not have proper boundaries - Sarah especially, going out to nightclubs with her daughters, for example, and from the sounds of it w/ Beatrice sitting in on the meetings her father had before the interview, she’s been thrust into the role of being the parent to her mother and father.
Beatrice and Eugenie are not children or teens-why shouldn’t they and their mother go out together to a nightclub?
And even if (big IF) Beatrice did sit in on a meeting about “the interview” so what? She is a 31 year old woman—not a child.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leopoldine View Post
OK. So Scotland Yard big-shots didn't tell BP about Andrew's encounters with teens?
1) Maybe there were not “encounters.”
2) It is not an RPO’s job to report to BP, in fact it probably would be against their rules of conduct. If an RPO had a concern, they would report it to their supervisor at the Metropolitan Police.
Reply With Quote
  #3126  
Old 11-26-2019, 03:55 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 5,176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonmaiden23 View Post
Andrew and Sarah did their most important jobs well. They raised children who are, by all accounts, very decent young women. There has never been one whiff of scandal about princesses Eugenie and Beatrice.

The fact that the Yorks kept their young children away from their personal chaos and left them unscathed is not something the Wales's managed.

It might be too long ago for many here to remember, but Andrew risked his life in uniform for his country. He didn't have to do so. It would have been easy for him to get out.

He insisted.

He and Sarah have made a botch out of their post divorce personal lives. But their many mistakes do not wipe out the good things. Not for me anyway.

It's why i flinch to hear these two now dismissed as loathsome, despicable wastes of human beings.
unfortutanlty, while they haven't been bad paretns and Andrew does have a service record, their other behaviour has been despicable.. and IMO they should be firmly moved out of Royal life.. I don't believe any charities will work with Andrew or Sarah now.. so it is inevitable..
Reply With Quote
  #3127  
Old 11-26-2019, 05:50 AM
texankitcat's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Dallas, United States
Posts: 1,003
Quote:
Originally Posted by hel View Post
Unless he's been jailed since I was out this evening, this discussion has nothing to do with the criminal justice system.

Innocent until proven guilty is a legal standard. If he'd been jailed, I'd be right there on the barricades with you. But no-one in this forum has the ability to jail Andrew, and everyone on this forum has the right to their opinion without it being dismissed because it doesn't adhere to a standard that doesn't apply.

Andrew has faced no legal consequences whatsoever. There's nothing protecting any of us from social consequences when we act poorly or, as with Andrew, when we come across as a dishonest and insensitive boor.
Well put! Andrew’s connection to Epstein and his sordid underaged sex ring is no secret for those that have paid attention throughout the years. The only difference is now he is having to answer the hard questions he never thought he would have to due to his arrogance and entitlement. His interview confirmed just how bad of a liar he is and cemented his fate with public opinion. Being a Royal Prince may give him a certain degree of legal protection, but it gives him zero protection from public outrage which is well deserved and over due IMO.
Reply With Quote
  #3128  
Old 11-26-2019, 06:30 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Somewhere in, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,184
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leopoldine View Post
OK. So Scotland Yard big-shots didn't tell BP about Andrew's encounters with teens?
Scotland Yard doesn't report to BP about their investigations.
Reply With Quote
  #3129  
Old 11-26-2019, 06:53 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 1,516
In my opinion Andrew lied during the interview. Sadly , he was too dumb too not at least pretend he had sympathy for the victims. I do believe he slept with that under age girl. Simply because why not she was there and offered up to him . That is what I see him as he doesn't care about others who he considers less than himself. Which he showed during the interview. Will he be brought to trial nope never gonna happen. I think with his ego this is the best punishment for him. If he has any sense he should be humiliated and embarrassed, but with his ego probably not.
Reply With Quote
  #3130  
Old 11-26-2019, 07:58 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 5,769
Quote:
Originally Posted by texankitcat View Post
His interview confirmed just how bad of a liar he is and cemented his fate with public opinion.

Please clarify what exactly he lied about and provide credible evidence that he was indeed lying.
Reply With Quote
  #3131  
Old 11-26-2019, 09:00 AM
ACO ACO is offline
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 2,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
Please clarify what exactly he lied about and provide credible evidence that he was indeed lying.
Well for one his odd comments on never partying without a tie or jacket. Also let’s not forget his lack of sweat. I mean the internet proved that lie in like 2 seconds.

If he lying about small stuff like that...
Reply With Quote
  #3132  
Old 11-26-2019, 09:33 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 5,769
Quote:
Originally Posted by ACO View Post
Well for one his odd comments on never partying without a tie or jacket. Also let’s not forget his lack of sweat. I mean the internet proved that lie in like 2 seconds.

If he lying about small stuff like that...



Nevertheless, after more than two weeks, the internet has been unable to debunk the pizza party alibi, hasn't it ? And Mrs Giuffre has not been able to provide any factual evidence that she ever had sex with Prince Andrew. I wonder why everybody assumes that she is more credible than the Duke of York.


I sense that Andrew is the victim of a preconceived idea that he is a straight male and a womanizer (not true either BTW) and, therefore, he must be lying about not having sex with the Epstein girls. If I recall it, he did admit though to having massages, which is not equal to having sex.



The burden is not on Andrew to prove that he is innocent, but rather on those who accuse him of wrongdoings to prove that he is guilty beyond any reasonable doubt.
Reply With Quote
  #3133  
Old 11-26-2019, 09:59 AM
ACO ACO is offline
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 2,853
Facts of the matter is Andrew got caught in two lies. And he probably was at Pizza Express in the afternoon, but that doesn’t mean he wasn’t partying that evening on the night in question. You can be in two places in the same day.

Oh another sketchy moment was him claiming to have never seen the upstairs of house yet knew that picture was the upstairs? But it’s also fake because... I don’t know. Yet to see a valid explanation.

I don’t know if Andrew is a womanizer or not. How can anyone? None of us personally know him to claim one way or the other. What I can observe is he is an arrogant entitled man man who clearly got rocked by his own ego.

Is Andrew guilty? Only he and the alleged victims know for sure. After all this time evidence likely is hard to come by but who knows how it all will play out. That’s why he should go talk to authorities especially if he had zero to hide.
Reply With Quote
  #3134  
Old 11-26-2019, 11:06 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Philadelphia, United States
Posts: 5,048
Quote:
Originally Posted by sophie25 View Post
I agree, giving RL to Andrew was as good as giving it to Sarah and I don't think that is something the Queen Mother would have wanted and definately not Princess Margaret who detested Sarah by the end of her life.
I've always thought that Fergie and Andrew bring out the worst in each other: the greed, the sense of entitlement, the cheerful disregard of any trouble they create for others.

Fergie should never have been allowed to move into RL with Andrew; the Queen could probably have intervened to prevent this and did not. I know Phillip objected to this and wanted Andrew to distance himself from his ex, but Andrew would not. The Queen could have forced the issue.
Reply With Quote
  #3135  
Old 11-26-2019, 11:17 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Bellevue, United States
Posts: 1,219
I should point out that uncropped versions of the Andrew-Giuffre photograph clearly show it was taken upstairs. You can see a banister and a stairwell on the left.

And if Andrew were a womanizer we would definitely know, courtesy of the media. But that doesn't mean he's celibate.
Reply With Quote
  #3136  
Old 11-26-2019, 11:17 AM
O-H Anglophile's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 3,640
Quote:
Originally Posted by ACO View Post

Oh another sketchy moment was him claiming to have never seen the upstairs of house yet knew that picture was the upstairs? But it’s also fake because... I don’t know. Yet to see a valid explanation.
The placement of the people in that photo next to the landing or hall railing clearly shows it is up a stairway. I could tell that.
Reply With Quote
  #3137  
Old 11-26-2019, 11:24 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 5,176
Quote:
Originally Posted by ACO View Post
Facts of the matter is Andrew got caught in two lies. And he probably was at Pizza Express in the afternoon, but that doesn’t mean he wasn’t partying that evening on the night in question. You can be in two places in the same day.

Oh another sketchy moment was him claiming to have never seen the upstairs of house yet knew that picture was the upstairs? But it’s also fake because... I don’t know. Yet to see a valid explanation.

I don’t know if Andrew is a womanizer or not. How can anyone? None of us personally know him to claim one way or the other. What I can observe is he is an arrogant entitled man man who clearly got rocked by his own ego.

Is Andrew guilty? Only he and the alleged victims know for sure. After all this time evidence likely is hard to come by but who knows how it all will play out. That’s why he should go talk to authorities especially if he had zero to hide.
All true, but as far as I know one of his friends said that he did indeed have an active sex life...and even if he is "not guilty" of knowingly having sex with an underage girl.. he clearly turned a blind eye to the fact that his good friend was a sex trafficker and there were girls around whom he must have seen..and known what Epstein was up to. That's bad enough behaviour for a member of Britain's premier family.. and he pretty definitely lied about quite a few things in that interview.. saying that he did not sweat, that he did not dress casually, that he did not "party"...or hug and embrace people. He refused to express regret at having kept up his friendship with Epstein even after his conviction.. and he also failed to express any sympathy for the Victims until pushed to do so.....
Reply With Quote
  #3138  
Old 11-26-2019, 11:28 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Somewhere in, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,184
Quote:
Originally Posted by O-H Anglophile View Post
The placement of the people in that photo next to the landing or hall railing clearly shows it is up a stairway. I could tell that.
Which proves, that he lied about never being upstairs. The picture was taken upstairs, so he had been upstairs.
Reply With Quote
  #3139  
Old 11-26-2019, 11:32 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 5,176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirabel View Post
I've always thought that Fergie and Andrew bring out the worst in each other: the greed, the sense of entitlement, the cheerful disregard of any trouble they create for others.

Fergie should never have been allowed to move into RL with Andrew; the Queen could probably have intervened to prevent this and did not. I know Phillip objected to this and wanted Andrew to distance himself from his ex, but Andrew would not. The Queen could have forced the issue.
I think that they Do bring out the worst in each other.. certainly. I don't think Andrew was greedy for money in his younger days.. I think that came when he was married to/divorced from Sarah and she was always over spending. He started to use his Trade envoy position to make contacts which made him money..
Reply With Quote
  #3140  
Old 11-26-2019, 11:38 AM
Ista's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: the West, United States
Posts: 2,535
Quote:
Originally Posted by ACO View Post
Facts of the matter is Andrew got caught in two lies. And he probably was at Pizza Express in the afternoon, but that doesn’t mean he wasn’t partying that evening on the night in question. You can be in two places in the same day.

Oh another sketchy moment was him claiming to have never seen the upstairs of house yet knew that picture was the upstairs? But it’s also fake because... I don’t know. Yet to see a valid explanation.

I don’t know if Andrew is a womanizer or not. How can anyone? None of us personally know him to claim one way or the other. What I can observe is he is an arrogant entitled man man who clearly got rocked by his own ego.

Is Andrew guilty? Only he and the alleged victims know for sure. After all this time evidence likely is hard to come by but who knows how it all will play out. That’s why he should go talk to authorities especially if he had zero to hide.
Actually, he got caught in at least three lies, the two you cite, and in addition the statement he made that when one parent was out of town, the other parent always stayed with the children, and since Sarah was out of town, he would have stayed at home. One of the newspapers disproved that by a simple reading of the CC to show that there were multiple occasions when both Andrew and Sarah had out of town engagements that would have meant neither of them were able to stay at home with Beatrice and Eugenie. If you're going to lie, at least don't be sloppy about it.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





Popular Tags
alqasimi archie mountbatten-windsor aristocracy belgian royal family birthday celebration castles chittagong cht clarence house countess of snowdon cover-up crown prince hussein's future wife crown princess victoria crusades current events danish history denmark duke & duchess of cambridge; duke of cambridge duke of sussex dutch dutch history dutch royal family felipe vi future germany henry v hill historical drama house of bourbon house of glucksburg house of orange-nassau house of saxe-coburg and gotha jerusalem jumma languages list of rulers lithuanian castles mail marriage mbs monaco royal monarchism nobel 2019 northern ireland norway norwegian royal family official visit palaces palestine prince charles prince harry prince of wales qe2 romanov family royal tour settings shakespeare snowdon spanish royal startling new evidence state visit sweden swedish royal family swedish royalty thai royal family tracts trump united kingdom usa


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:38 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2020
Jelsoft Enterprises
×