 |
|

11-20-2019, 07:35 AM
|
 |
Royal Highness
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Louisville, United States
Posts: 1,784
|
|
The hits just keep on coming
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...rity-trip.html
They can't place him with Roberts but the gaps doesn't clear him.
Businesses are running from Andrew's patronages. Ill feelings for the monarchy. The queen IMO needs to take off her mom hat and put on the crown as monarch and get in front if this.
|

11-20-2019, 07:41 AM
|
 |
Courtier
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Nuth, Netherlands
Posts: 839
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by wyevale
How many times is it necessary to state the legal position in the UK ?
In Great Britain (England, Wales and Scotland), prostitution itself (the exchange of sexual services for money) is legal, and the age of consent is 16...
but a number of related activities, including soliciting in a public place, kerb crawling, owning or managing a brothel, pimping and pandering, are crimes...none of which [as far as I know] has the Duke been accused of..
Whatever our opinions of this matter maybe, clarity on the Law is important.
|
Apparently those 2 times were not enough or you need to read better. Age of consent is for "non-commercial sex" and for cliënts. Age of consent for the prostitutes themselves is 18. However, what is not clear to me is whether a cliënt has a duty to "research" the prostitutes age. If the prostitute was forced into prostitution it is (logically) also illegal and it doesn't matter if the cliënt didn't know.
Quote:
Sexual Exploitation of Children
Children under 18, exploited in prostitution, should be treated as victims of abuse. See Guidance on Prosecuting Child Abuse Cases, elsewhere in the Legal Guidance.
Those who sexually abuse children should be prosecuted under Sections 47 – 50 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003. See Abuse of Children through Prostitution or Pornography in the Sexual Offences Act 2003 – Guidance, elsewhere in the Legal Guidance. This covers the prosecution of those who coerce, exploit and abuse children through prostitution. These offences carry a higher penalty.
Consent is irrelevant. A reasonable belief that the child is over 18 affords a defence if the child is 13 or over. There is no defence of reasonable belief if the child is aged under 13.
|
https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidanc...n-prostitution
And this is not my opinion, this is the law.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...d-1026318.html
|

11-20-2019, 08:08 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Middlewich, United Kingdom
Posts: 21,391
|
|
Rumours circling that Sarah pushed Andrew to do the interview to get ahead of the papers. That I can definitely believe.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
|

11-20-2019, 08:19 AM
|
Heir Apparent
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Philadelphia, United States
Posts: 5,645
|
|
I'm seeing much speculation about funding for Andrew's lavish lifestyle. As the DM keeps stating, the numbers don't add up.
Andrew should surrender his patronages and bow out with what grace he can muster, before he is forced to.
|

11-20-2019, 08:28 AM
|
Heir Apparent
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 3,948
|
|
Rebecca English writes palace sources are calling the media coverage of Andrew a “witch-hunt”
Now that’s interesting.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...officials.html
|

11-20-2019, 08:55 AM
|
 |
Majesty
|
|
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 6,034
|
|
I have not visited this thread since before the interview. So it opened for me on page 16, with discussion of how the Palace would have vetted questions before the interview were agreed to.
Some of the posts are funny/sad in their faith in the BRF and PR interviews. I admit to being cynical on Palace PR effectiveness.
Andrew met ALL my expectations with his answers. Completely out of touch with how he sounds to average people. Why he thinks he is convincing/endearing/credible when he comments on himself is beyond me.
To be fair, I also was an adult during Andy's relationship with Jeff. I agree that the social context of the time was different. Which excuses nothing. And to expect anyone today to give a pass because context has changed is just stupid.
What a mess!
__________________
"And the tabloid press will be a pain in the ass, as usual." - Royal Norway
|

11-20-2019, 10:16 AM
|
Heir Presumptive
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,085
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdmirerUS
I have not visited this thread since before the interview. So it opened for me on page 16, with discussion of how the Palace would have vetted questions before the interview were agreed to.
Some of the posts are funny/sad in their faith in the BRF and PR interviews. I admit to being cynical on Palace PR effectiveness.
Andrew met ALL my expectations with his answers. Completely out of touch with how he sounds to average people. Why he thinks he is convincing/endearing/credible when he comments on himself is beyond me.
To be fair, I also was an adult during Andy's relationship with Jeff. I agree that the social context of the time was different. Which excuses nothing. And to expect anyone today to give a pass because context has changed is just stupid.
What a mess!
|
What was surprising to me was how ill prepared he seemed doing the interview, stumbling over questions, seeming to have no good answers to a couple of questions anyone should have known were coming, his overall demeanour, his seeming lack of consideration for the victims.. I could go on.
[...]
They need to hire an experienced Pitt bull and give him/her the authority to clean house. Everyone’s PR team ultimately reports to the Pitt bull, the Pitt bull reports directly to the Queen or The PoW. If anyone even looks sideways at the media without it being cleared by the the Pitt Bull, that person’s PR team is fired and the disobedient royal in question is now the direct responsibility of, you guessed it, the Pitt bull and their team. If the royal doesn’t like being put on a short leash? There’s the door.
|

11-20-2019, 10:27 AM
|
Majesty
|
|
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 8,850
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ACO
|
I agree . It is clearly a witch hunt.
So far I have not seen any evidence that Andrew has lied about being at a pizza express party at the time when Virginia alleges they were together. Yet, everybody here assumes he is guilty of having sex with a trafficked minor.
And, again, most of the criticism with respect to Andrew’s interview relates to his choice of words or his demeanor, which actually is mostly an issue of cultural perception. For example , when Andrew referred to Epstein as conducting himself in an unbecoming way ( or something like that) and was frowned upon by the BBC interviewer for not using stronger language, I genuinely believe his explanation that he was just “ being polite”, which is the culture he grew up in (where people refrain from using harsh words to describe even the most despicable villains).
|

11-20-2019, 10:46 AM
|
 |
Imperial Majesty
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 12,309
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno
I agree . It is clearly a witch hunt.
So far I have not seen any evidence that Andrew has lied about being at a pizza express party at the time when Virginia alleges they were together. Yet, everybody here assumes he is guilty of having sex with a trafficked minor.
And, again, most of the criticism with respect to Andrew’s interview relates to his choice of words or his demeanor, which actually is mostly an issue of cultural perception. For example , when Andrew referred to Epstein as conducting himself in an unbecoming way ( or something like that) and was frowned upon by the BBC interviewer for not using stronger language, I genuinely believe his explanation that he was just “ being polite”, which is the culture he grew up in (where people refrain from using harsh words to describe even the most despicable villains).
|
I don't think that's an accurate representation of 'everybody's' view. Most ppl haven't even expressed their opinion as to guilt or innocence.
What most ppl here are up in arms about is his actions before/after the interview and what he said during the interview.
I'm going to find it really hard to buy the idea that he is so bound by his culture he can't use harsh words....please the man was in the military for years and I've yet to meet one (regardless of Nationality) that can't curse like a sailor not to mention bluntly stating their opinion.
LaRae
|

11-20-2019, 11:46 AM
|
 |
Royal Highness
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Louisville, United States
Posts: 1,784
|
|
Wow. Andrew wants a do over interview.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...nd-chance.html
If true I wonder if Fergie put him up to this one like the last time? Someone REALLY needs to get in front of Andrew's face.
|

11-20-2019, 11:49 AM
|
 |
Aristocracy
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 191
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by wyevale
How many times is it necessary to state the legal position in the UK ?
In Great Britain (England, Wales and Scotland), prostitution itself (the exchange of sexual services for money) is legal, and the age of consent is 16...
but a number of related activities, including soliciting in a public place, kerb crawling, owning or managing a brothel, pimping and pandering, are crimes...none of which [as far as I know] has the Duke been accused of..
Whatever our opinions of this matter maybe, clarity on the Law is important.
|
The Thing is that they were "Together" in the US where is it a crime.
|

11-20-2019, 11:51 AM
|
Imperial Majesty
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 11,400
|
|
so Andrew now realises he should have expressed some sympathy with the victims now after numerous commentators have remarked that he showed no sympaty/??
|

11-20-2019, 12:07 PM
|
Heir Apparent
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 3,948
|
|
I don't see how this is a witch-hunt. They just throwing what Andrew said out his own mouth... ON VIDEO... back at him. He created this circus by agreeing to go on camera with a seasoned reporter and spew nonsense.
And now he wants to do it again? Oy.
|

11-20-2019, 12:28 PM
|
 |
Imperial Majesty
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 15,827
|
|
The York Minster Fund is reviewing Andrew’s patronage at their next Trustee meeting-
https://mobile.twitter.com/lizzieitv...45835806564352
The bank firm Barclays are reviewing their sponsorship of Pitch@Palace-
https://mobile.twitter.com/LizzieITV...52210364370945
Quote:
Originally Posted by Madame Verseau
|
The only people Prince Andrew should be talking to next is the FBI and other law enforcements.
__________________
"WE CANNOT PRAY IN LOVE AND LIVE IN HATE AND STILL THINK WE ARE WORSHIPING GOD."
A.W. TOZER
|

11-20-2019, 12:52 PM
|
 |
Former Administrator
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Suffolk, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,227
|
|
Please note that posts referring to other members of the royal family in the context of interviews they have done and things going on in their lives have been edited or removed.
Let's stick to discussing the Duke of York in regard to his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein and subsequent events.
__________________
JACK
|

11-20-2019, 12:59 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Middlewich, United Kingdom
Posts: 21,391
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dman
|
Not quite accurate;
Here’s Andrews full statement:
https://twitter.com/byqueenvic/statu...502497280?s=21
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
|

11-20-2019, 01:01 PM
|
Aristocracy
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Tampere, Finland
Posts: 228
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dman
|
This is probably best solution. After such accusations him just haven't any other options.
|

11-20-2019, 01:02 PM
|
 |
Imperial Majesty
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 15,827
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumutqueen
|
Yeah, I forgot to add “for the foreseeable future.” I just added it. Typing fast here.
__________________
"WE CANNOT PRAY IN LOVE AND LIVE IN HATE AND STILL THINK WE ARE WORSHIPING GOD."
A.W. TOZER
|

11-20-2019, 01:06 PM
|
Heir Apparent
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Herefordshire, United Kingdom
Posts: 3,397
|
|
Jolly good thing too...
As has been said before the BRF hasn't survived for a thousand years without making speedy, pragmatic changes when urgently required...
|
 |
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
|
|
Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
Recent Discussions |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|