The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #3861  
Old 06-03-2020, 02:15 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Northamptonshire, United Kingdom
Posts: 950
That all makes sense thanks.

I agree with your sentiments in the last paragraph.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #3862  
Old 06-03-2020, 02:42 PM
Elenath's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Nuth, Netherlands
Posts: 814
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pranter View Post
According to UK law (I read about this months ago) her age is not the issue in this situation. A trafficked person cannot give consent even if she was 20. Ignorance of the law is not always going to save you either. Many a man has found this out.


LaRae
A bit late, but I believe the minimum age for prostitution is 18. So even if she wasn't trafficked, someone underaged cannot consent to prostitution.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #3863  
Old 06-03-2020, 03:05 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 15,325
There are a few reasons I'd like to add to the discussion of just why Andrew will not be arrested for sleeping with Ms. Guiffre (three times supposedly).

#1. First of all, the charge would have to be filed by Ms. Guiffre with the court of law in the state in which the "crime" took place. With Ms. Giuffre, I believe that would be London, New York, Palm Beach, Florida or Little St. James Island in the Virgin Islands. The only real accusation that has come to light was the incident in London. As Ms. Guiffre was of the age of consent, the Met Police found no basis to pursue the allegations issued by Ms. Guiffre further.

#2. The ongoing investigation right now into sex trafficking by Epstein and his cohorts by the FBI will not prosecute sole claims filed by the victims of Epstein such as Ms. Giuffre is. Those will have to be filed in civil court as per #1.

#3. Should charges be actually filed against Andrew in the US as to his crime of sleeping with an underage girl, then Andrew would have to be extradited to stand trial. In order for Andrew to be extradited, the crime he's accused of committing must be a crime in both the US and the UK and carry a sentence of at least a year in prison. So it stands that if Ms. Guiffre was 17 and not of the age of consent in New York or wherever she files charges, those charges are not a crime in London and extradition goes out the window. I do not know what the sentence would be for this particular crime. Remember, Epstein got 18 months in Florida but that was a "sweetheart" deal since ruled to be invalid.

What the FBI want Andrew for is to talk to him and find out from him what he knew of Epstein and Maxwell's activities over the years. This does not mean that they're looking to prosecute Andrew at all. From Andrew's actions and demeanor after all hell broke loose, it does make Andrew look like he's "hiding something" but being guilty of an actual crime is certainly not one of them at this time. Who knows what incontrovertible evidence is still to be found in all this mess?

Just my thoughts.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
Reply With Quote
  #3864  
Old 06-03-2020, 03:37 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,584
While we could all discuss the finer points of age of consent, the biggest crime committed by Andrew is very, very, very poor judgement. He is now paying the greatest sentence -- social ostracization from his royal duties.
Reply With Quote
  #3865  
Old 06-03-2020, 03:47 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 15,325
So very true Suztav. Andrew gives credence to the statement "Give a man enough rope and eventually he'll hang himself with it." Epstein did it literally. Andrew has done it figuratively. Both can be deemed suicide. One of the body and one of reputation.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
Reply With Quote
  #3866  
Old 06-03-2020, 04:04 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: n/a, United States
Posts: 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
There are a few reasons I'd like to add to the discussion of just why Andrew will not be arrested for sleeping with Ms. Guiffre (three times supposedly).

#1. First of all, the charge would have to be filed by Ms. Guiffre with the court of law in the state in which the "crime" took place. With Ms. Giuffre, I believe that would be London, New York, Palm Beach, Florida or Little St. James Island in the Virgin Islands. The only real accusation that has come to light was the incident in London. As Ms. Guiffre was of the age of consent, the Met Police found no basis to pursue the allegations issued by Ms. Guiffre further.

#2. The ongoing investigation right now into sex trafficking by Epstein and his cohorts by the FBI will not prosecute sole claims filed by the victims of Epstein such as Ms. Giuffre is. Those will have to be filed in civil court as per #1.

#3. Should charges be actually filed against Andrew in the US as to his crime of sleeping with an underage girl, then Andrew would have to be extradited to stand trial. In order for Andrew to be extradited, the crime he's accused of committing must be a crime in both the US and the UK and carry a sentence of at least a year in prison. So it stands that if Ms. Guiffre was 17 and not of the age of consent in New York or wherever she files charges, those charges are not a crime in London and extradition goes out the window. I do not know what the sentence would be for this particular crime. Remember, Epstein got 18 months in Florida but that was a "sweetheart" deal since ruled to be invalid.

What the FBI want Andrew for is to talk to him and find out from him what he knew of Epstein and Maxwell's activities over the years. This does not mean that they're looking to prosecute Andrew at all. From Andrew's actions and demeanor after all hell broke loose, it does make Andrew look like he's "hiding something" but being guilty of an actual crime is certainly not one of them at this time. Who knows what incontrovertible evidence is still to be found in all this mess?

Just my thoughts.
Wouldn't this be like obstruction of justice or something?
Reply With Quote
  #3867  
Old 06-03-2020, 04:20 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 15,325
No. Andrew is not obligated to cooperate with the FBI if he doesn't want to. The fact that he hasn't though is reflective on his character and adds to the speculation that he's "hiding something" and won't cooperate.

Especially after stating publicly in that disastrous interview that he was willing to cooperate.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
Reply With Quote
  #3868  
Old 06-03-2020, 04:28 PM
Somebody's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Somewhere, Suriname
Posts: 4,974
Quote:
Originally Posted by KellyAtLast View Post
Wouldn't this be like obstruction of justice or something?
No, I don't think so. For obstruction of justice (see legal dictionary) to take place, it seems the bar is much higher than not cooperating with an investigation.
Reply With Quote
  #3869  
Old 06-07-2020, 06:39 PM
theroyalfly's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: May 2019
Location: N/A, Australia
Posts: 1,422
Many articles have appeared in last hours about US either 'requesting' or 'demanding' Prince Andrew to appear in court over Jeffrey Epstein links.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-new...-over-22153995

https://www.news.com.au/entertainmen...85106a874d77b6

https://metro.co.uk/2020/06/07/usa-d...tein-12818677/
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #3870  
Old 06-07-2020, 06:56 PM
Pranter's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 12,091
So...can the UK government compel Andrew to cooperate?



LaRae
Reply With Quote
  #3871  
Old 06-07-2020, 07:08 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 15,325
In one word. No. That would mean extradition to the US and the UK will not extradite Andrew to the US unless he's been accused of a crime that is a crime in both the US and the UK and punishable by at least a year in prison.

However, they can goad, plead, advise and urge Andrew to cooperate. In the end though, its up to Andrew to cooperate.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
Reply With Quote
  #3872  
Old 06-07-2020, 07:17 PM
Pranter's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 12,091
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
In one word. No. That would mean extradition to the US and the UK will not extradite Andrew to the US unless he's been accused of a crime that is a crime in both the US and the UK and punishable by at least a year in prison.

However, they can goad, plead, advise and urge Andrew to cooperate. In the end though, its up to Andrew to cooperate.
Ok so unless he comes to the U.S. or agrees to meet with officials in the U.K. he will never answer any questions.



LaRae
Reply With Quote
  #3873  
Old 06-07-2020, 07:34 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 15,325
That's my understanding but then again I'm so far away from being any kind of an expert at this stuff that a dandelion probably knows more than I do.

I think maybe a lot of stuff is hitting the media lately because of the recent airing of "Jeffrey Epstein: Filthy Rich" on Netflix recently. I am, however, hopeful that this investigation is still going strong and hasn't been pushed into a "cold case" folder.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
Reply With Quote
  #3874  
Old 06-07-2020, 07:43 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 7,387
I definitely believe Andrew should answer questions but the main question in my mind in all this mess is where is Ghislaine Maxwell? That woman undoubtedly has many of the answers to the prosecution's questions yet nothing has happened to her and she's certainly not been charged with anything. If she went on trial and told the truth (ha) then the Andrew involvement (as well as everything else) would become a whole lot clearer IMO.
Reply With Quote
  #3875  
Old 06-07-2020, 07:54 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 15,325
What's floated through my mind is that as, according to the articles, they've stated that Andrew is now part of the criminal investigation, the big question is in what regards is he part of it? My thought is that they're maybe of a mind that Andrew could have/may have/is aiding and abetting Ghislaine Maxwell evade prosecution. However, they do *not* imply that Andrew is suspected or or is alleged to have committed a crime.

The longer Andrew plays this out, the more it looks like he really does have something to hide or is protecting someone or..or.. or...
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
Reply With Quote
  #3876  
Old 06-07-2020, 07:59 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Coastal California, United States
Posts: 1,230
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
There are a few reasons I'd like to add to the discussion of just why Andrew will not be arrested for sleeping with Ms. Guiffre (three times supposedly).

#1. First of all, the charge would have to be filed by Ms. Guiffre with the court of law in the state in which the "crime" took place. With Ms. Giuffre, I believe that would be London, New York, Palm Beach, Florida or Little St. James Island in the Virgin Islands. The only real accusation that has come to light was the incident in London. As Ms. Guiffre was of the age of consent, the Met Police found no basis to pursue the allegations issued by Ms. Guiffre further.

#2. The ongoing investigation right now into sex trafficking by Epstein and his cohorts by the FBI will not prosecute sole claims filed by the victims of Epstein such as Ms. Giuffre is. Those will have to be filed in civil court as per #1.

#3. Should charges be actually filed against Andrew in the US as to his crime of sleeping with an underage girl, then Andrew would have to be extradited to stand trial. In order for Andrew to be extradited, the crime he's accused of committing must be a crime in both the US and the UK and carry a sentence of at least a year in prison. So it stands that if Ms. Guiffre was 17 and not of the age of consent in New York or wherever she files charges, those charges are not a crime in London and extradition goes out the window. I do not know what the sentence would be for this particular crime. Remember, Epstein got 18 months in Florida but that was a "sweetheart" deal since ruled to be invalid.

What the FBI want Andrew for is to talk to him and find out from him what he knew of Epstein and Maxwell's activities over the years. This does not mean that they're looking to prosecute Andrew at all. From Andrew's actions and demeanor after all hell broke loose, it does make Andrew look like he's "hiding something" but being guilty of an actual crime is certainly not one of them at this time. Who knows what incontrovertible evidence is still to be found in all this mess?

Just my thoughts.
A couple of corrections - regarding the first point, for state criminal charges, yes they would be filed in the state where they occurred, as happened in Florida w/ Epstein. Ms. Guffrie does not file criminal charges, the prosecutor for the relevant jurisdiction files charges in a criminal case, never the victim.
As you note, a victim can file a civil suit, however there are statute of limitation issues which may bar a victim doing so.
However, federal crimes are also possible and do not have to be filed in a specific state, as happened w/ Epstein where charges were filed in Florida & later in NY.
I can’t even guess what evidence the FBI is seeking or what crimes they are contemplating filing, but my brief survey of possible federal charges awhile ago revealed several conspiracy/trafficking type possibilities. The Feds can be relentless - remember they went after members of the mob for tax crimes because that was all they could prove. So the question is not as simple as did Andrew sleep w/ one 17 year old in London.
Regarding extradition, I see that what has triggered a resurgence of articles is that DOJ has officially filed a Mutual legal assistance request pursuant to the existing treaty between the USA and the U.K., so at this point extradition isn’t really the issue. It will take several months, but it is possible Andrew could be forced to answer questions pursuant to the treaty. The criteria for an MLA are different than the criteria for extradition. The questioning might occur in the U.K., & of course Andrew can assert his 5th amendment right to not incriminate himself and refuse to answer some questions on that basis. Interesting side point, if the prosecutor gives the person asserting the 5th amendment immunity, the person must then answer.
Reply With Quote
  #3877  
Old 06-07-2020, 08:58 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 7,387
Question. Can a British subject being questioned (in England) in a US official inquiry involving possible criminal matters, evoke Fifth Amendment rights, given that such rights don't exist under English law? (Britain of course has no written Constitution, just statute and Common Law.)
Reply With Quote
  #3878  
Old 06-07-2020, 09:45 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Coastal California, United States
Posts: 1,230
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
Question. Can a British subject being questioned (in England) in a US official inquiry involving possible criminal matters, evoke Fifth Amendement rights, given that such rights don't exist under English law? (Britain of course has no written Constitution, just statute and Common Law.)
I’m no expert in U.K. law, but I believe the U.K. recognizes a right to not incriminate yourself based on the US supreme court’s analysis of British law in this case https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/97-873
I’m not sure whether the Supreme Court has specifically addressed a nonresident alien’s right to invoke the 5th to avoid prosecution by the US - maybe I’ll find the answer w/ further digging :)
Reply With Quote
  #3879  
Old 06-07-2020, 10:05 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 7,387
Thanks sndral.
I live in Australia and our laws, like those of many Commonwealth countries, are based on the British model. (Though we do have a written Constitution it doesn't address those issues.)

However, I have read of cases here in the last few years, at Inquests, where a witness has stated 'I prefer not to answer that question on the grounds that I may incriminate myself'. That is similar I suppose, though it doesn't necessarily save them later on!
Reply With Quote
  #3880  
Old 06-07-2020, 10:46 PM
Madame Verseau's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Louisville, United States
Posts: 1,740
Diplomatic leverage can come into play. The wife of a US diplomat killed the British teen (sorry I forgot names) was officially charged in the UK. The UK doesn't get her unless Andrew talks to the Feds. The current occupant in the White House will not have the State Department take that tact; but if there is a new administration in January 2021 things could change.
__________________

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
abdication althorp anastasia bridal gown british chittagong cht clarence house danish royalty diana princess of wales dna dubai dutch dutch royal family earl of snowdon facts general news thread george vi heraldry hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume hill historical drama history house of glucksburg intro italian royal family jacobite japan jewellery jumma king salman languages list of rulers mail mary: crown princess of denmark monaco history nepalese royal jewels nobel 2019 northern ireland norway norwegian royal family palestine popularity prince dimitri princess chulabhorn walailak princess laurentien princess of orange princess ribha queen mathilde random facts royal dress-ups royal jewels royal marriage royal re-enactments. royalty of taiwan royal wedding royal wedding gown saudi arabia serbian royal family settings snowdon swedish royal family thailand tips tracts uae customs united states of america wittelsbach working royals; full-time royals; part-time royals;


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:46 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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