Oops! The Prince formerly known as Duke drops another clanger!

I don't see why she shouldn't have a house on the Windsor estate, especially if she pays rent. No one's claiming she's anyone's problem are they?

It can't be easy knowing you're the subject of such vitriol.

I disagree OldFrill because if this is something PA and Sarah want then that's how it should be reported, not that according to one 'source' it's her, and according to another it's him.

When even the simplest things are being incorrectly reported, how on earth can anyone be expected to believe anything?

Anniebach

Doodledog
1. Russell Brand is guilty in your opinion,I haven’t the foggiest

2. Schofield judged and found guilty without being tried in a court of law, I don’t know why he kept his homosexuality private you seem to believe it was he had sex with minor?

3. Press didn’t know a thing about Saville? apologies no not serious, sarcasm.

The press chooses guilt or innocence, God help the King

He might have wanted to keep his homosexuality private out of respect to his wife, the mother of his children. I had a friend whose husband was outed as gay and she felt totally humiliated so he might have wanted to avoid that

Smileless2012

This is what I mean OldFrill. You say Sarah now wants a Crown property provided for her but according to merlot's post PA has ^agreed to vacate Royal Lodge providing he can have Frogmore cottage for himself and Adelaide cottage for Sarah, so which is it? PA's demands or her's?

I agree OldFrill about the interview but even that didn't provide any evidence to substantiate VG's claims. Being manipulative, entitled and self centred doesn't necessarily equate to having sex with someone whose been trafficked.

There is much more to the public disgust of Andrew than Virginia Guiffre 's claims and the fact he paid £12+million to someone he said he'd never met. He spent 4 days saying fond farewells to a paedophile in his den. He has known
contacts with dubious (to say the least) individuals and foreign governments.its on record that he frequently lead the high life at the expense of tax payers and charity. He has lived rent free for decades in a Crown Property. He has resigned his tutors in such a way that he's putting it across that he's doing it for his country. Charles has said he doesn't want parliamentary time given to the situation (since when does the monarch instruct the democratic parliament). All this makes, for many people, the Royal Family to be above the law and that severely, if not catastrophically, undermines their position.

Then you have all the leaked emails, l hear nothing to suggest they are not legitimate - maybe Andrew could appear on Newsnight again to try to defend or explain himself, there is a precedent.

Tutors - titles

theworriedwell yes the judgement of Schofield was so wrong , no charges, why must people in the public eye be accused of guilt because they. Choose not to prosecute their accusers

Little wonder the royal family chooses ‘never explain’ never complain’,

You've just posted something that has no basis in fact NoFrill.
Charles hasn't and couldn't instruct parliament even if he wanted too.

He's said he doesn't want parliament to spend time on this issue but if they choose to do so, they will.

See how easily claims and allegations can be written as fact.

@Smileless

None of what's being discussed with regard to PA is about a criminal case. The definition being a case that comes to court,

The criminal case regarding Epsteins procuress Ghislaine Maxwell has been to court IN USA. She was found guilty and sentenced to 20 years which she is currently serving.

Epstein pled guilty to child sex abuse and procuring a prostitute and spent time in jail.

He was back in jail on more sex crime charges when he died before they got to court.

The witness reports and the criminal evidence Epstein was about to face , ( such as his email history) , did not die with him.

I think the best thing would be for the king to avoid any chance of later accusations of housing Andrew inappropriately as more revelations emerge. He could allocate a sum from his private fortune to buy a property for Andrew, or one each for him and Sarah using that sum, in a place of his choice, away from the crown estates, and end his reliance on support from his family completely so he could live as a private individual, and they could be free of accusations of nepotism. I don’t imagine he will be wanted at Windsor.

By our friends shall we be known

The criminal case re Ghislaine Maxwell and Epstein is irrelevant butterandjam as no criminal case has been brought against PA and this thread is about him.

The criminal convictions of Epstein and Maxwell are absolutely relevant to discussions about Prince Andrew and Sarah Ferguson

I disagree Iam when 'discussions' become a trial by media.

So,” by our friends shall we be known” really Iam ?

Smileless2012

The criminal case re Ghislaine Maxwell and Epstein is irrelevant butterandjam as no criminal case has been brought against PA and this thread is about him.

Virginia Giuffre v. Prince Andrew was a lawsuit filed in U.S. federal court under New York's Child Victims Act. It alleged that she was forced to have several sexual encounters with Andrew in the early 2000s at the age of 17, after being sex trafficked by the American financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

Andrew paid her 12 million to drop the case.

So Guiffre had a choice, she chose money

Anniebach she founded a U.S. non-profit organisation called Victims Refuse Silence in 2015 to support survivors of sex trafficking, which was later relaunched as Speak Out, Act, Reclaim (SOAR) in November 2021. Giuffre was an advocate for survivors and was known for her role in high-profile cases.

Yes I know Casdon , I only spoke of her accepting the monies offered,her choice and legal

Anniebach

So,” by our friends shall we be known” really Iam ?

Do you not think you can tell a lot about a person by the company they keep?

Yes I know that butterandjam and as Annie's posted she accepted the money as an out of court settlement. She could have gone to court and won a financial settlement if she'd won the case.

Not always ViceVersa.

No

Smileless2012

Yes I know that butterandjam and as Annie's posted she accepted the money as an out of court settlement. She could have gone to court and won a financial settlement if she'd won the case.

I never understood why she accepted that settlement when she’d have won the case.

It would have been much better for all concerned if the case had gone to court Mollygo, both sides were wrong IMO to settle.

Mollygo

Smileless2012

Yes I know that butterandjam and as Annie's posted she accepted the money as an out of court settlement. She could have gone to court and won a financial settlement if she'd won the case.

I never understood why she accepted that settlement when she’d have won the case.

I think it’s because the legal system is stacked in favour of the privileged Mollygo, they can afford the very best lawyers, who keep raising new points of law, and delay and delay cases so that the legal costs for the person who has brought the case are crippling, and they are forced to give up.