Epstein, so sick of it everywhere.

I do not blame Andrew for refusing to appear in court in America. Their justice system is different from ours, and it seems as though a person is presumed guilty unless they can prove their innocence, Mike Lynch, British business man, was summoned to appear in America and immediately placed under house arrest for two years until he was able to prove his innocence. (He was the man who drowned with five others when his yacht the Bayesian capsized). I would very much like to see Mandelson in gaol, but not in America, paraded handcuffed and manacled in prison clothes.

Sodapop, I agree with your post. There comes a time, when the chips are really down, when you think, my brother , right or wrong, and you stand by them. Doesn't mean you approve or condone their behaviour or forgive them for what they have done.

I think you are wrong David49. I would lay a pound to a penny that there is evidence, and probably photographs, of Andrew in flagrente with an underage girl. I think the King knows that is a very likely scenario.

M0nica

Anniebach

MOnica

for AMW, his family are like all normal people and do not like washing their dirty linen in public. But when, a few months ago, the King announced his draconian actions on AMW, taking all his titles, and banishing him to a rundown farm house at the extremes of the Sandringham estate. The UK equivalent of being sent to Siberia, it was pretty clear then that this was because the King knew that there was more damning evidence due to come out of exactly what kind of unpleasant man and a disgrace t his family ANW really is.

You believe the King knew there was more to come months before ?

Yes, I do. What do you have diplomats and ambassadors for, if not to find out what is going on behind the scenes and making sure you afre prepared to it.

The King may not have known the exact detail but he would have known enough to know that the only way forward was to send Andrew to a gulag in Siberia and throw his ex-wife to the dogs.

I agree, M0nica Presumably the Queen paid because she was aware her son was involved, she chose money to "never explain". AMW hadn't and hasn't been convicted, the King is "never explaining" sending AMW to Siberia.

eazybee

I do not blame Andrew for refusing to appear in court in America. Their justice system is different from ours, and it seems as though a person is presumed guilty unless they can prove their innocence, Mike Lynch, British business man, was summoned to appear in America and immediately placed under house arrest for two years until he was able to prove his innocence. (He was the man who drowned with five others when his yacht the Bayesian capsized). I would very much like to see Mandelson in gaol, but not in America, paraded handcuffed and manacled in prison clothes.

Sodapop, I agree with your post. There comes a time, when the chips are really down, when you think, my brother , right or wrong, and you stand by them. Doesn't mean you approve or condone their behaviour or forgive them for what they have done.

Reading posts on here, it seems as though a person is presumed guilty unless they can prove their innocence,
As more and more assumptions are made from photographs I doubt if anyone would believe any proof of innocence that appeared.
Andrew was obviously involved, as was PM, but none of us know to what extent.
There’s lots of I believe and I think evidence here. Would it be allowed if Andrew had been arrested?

Smileless2012
Why was his accuser prepared to be paid off Basgetti? Why didn't she want her day in court if she was telling the truth? I would have done, wouldn't you?

I have no idea if Andrew is innocent because there has yet to be any evidence to say that he's guilty and here in the UK, the burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove guilt, not for the defence to prove innocence.

It may be poor judgement for Charles to financially support his brother, but that's his judgement to make.

I agree.

Also, Basgetti’s wouldn't spit on him if he was on fire comment about her abusive brother could ring true with many people, but how far would the same people go to avoid publicity about their own personal lives, even if it meant protecting the alleged wrongdoer?

Should Mandelson have been assumed innocent if Andrew was? I don’t think it cuts both ways myself.

There is mounting evidence against Andrew, and in light of what we have seen I feel it is stretching credibility to breaking point to assume he was innocent. Of course people don’t want to believe ill of a member of the Royal Family, but this can’t be denied. There are new pieces arising every day. Here is the latest.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ckgkjj5e28ko

The King has taken all Andrew’s titles away but he is hardly likely to send him on his way without a backward glance. And I imagine even if he dislikes his own brother immensely he could feel beholden to his late mother who always had a soft spot for Andrew.

Why just fixate on Andrew? Just because he's a well known name. What about the hundreds of other wealthy men involved?

Aveline

Why just fixate on Andrew? Just because he's a well known name. What about the hundreds of other wealthy men involved?

They are being unearthed, Bill Gates, Bill Clinton, and of course Trump though pinning him down could be hard seeing as there are so many redactions.

Noam Chomsky is not looking good either.

Quote Casdon Wed 04-Feb-26 14:40:14
Should Mandelson have been assumed innocent if Andrew was? I don’t think it cuts both ways myself.

There is mounting evidence against Andrew, and in light of what we have seen I feel it is stretching credibility to breaking point to assume he was innocent. Of course people don’t want to believe ill of a member of the Royal Family, but this can’t be denied. There are new pieces arising every day. Here is the latest.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ckgkjj5e28ko

People don’t want to believe ill of the royal family? How patronising

A newly renovated “cottage” i. e. big house, in Sandringham is hardly equivalent to Siberia. No doubt it will have everything new and luxurious for Andy to enjoy playing his video games and he can drive round in one of his many vehicles. Poor him.

Aveline

Why just fixate on Andrew? Just because he's a well known name. What about the hundreds of other wealthy men involved?

Because it’s easier. More people can claim to know about Andrew.

It adds spice to the We shouldn’t have a Royal Family viewers.
Including those who think we should have a president instead, although with the current examples of famous presidents . . .

The hundreds of other wealthy men involved are probably sweating at the moment, but info on them is less readily available. Until we have those names (most of whom would be unknown to us) it’s hard to post about their thoughts.
Easier to claim to know what the King is thinking.
Maybe he even wishes for anonymity to post his views, the way we can on here.

foxie48

MaizieD

Peter Jukes (Byline Times) has a thread about Epstein's contact with Putin.

bsky.app/profile/peterjukes.bsky.social/post/3mdyjf5kxlc2z

Very interesting! I've always thought Epstein's operation was about more than blackmailing rich people for their cash. On the face of it, Epstein had plenty of money and not a lot of evidence about where it came from. Trump certainly knew about Epstein's penchant for young girls and is on record commenting about it. There is still a lot more to come out, isn't there?

Goodness only knows what's been going on that hasn't come out yet - given that what has come out includes murder, human sacrifice, you name it....

If there's even worse = eeek!!!! Could there be worse than that?!

I've noted the quick "Send in the cavalry" and off came the most "presentable/popular" royal sent off to Wales to wear a Welsh coat, make a fuss of a dog (loads of people have dogs here) and smile at everyone.

ronib

I’d much rather the King paid for Andrew from his vast fortune than the British taxpayer!!

That came across in the report I read. The King cannot allow him to keep all his tiles and privileges as if nothing has gone on, however, he is still his brother so will fund his move. As you say, far better than the poor beleaguered tax payer.

I so agree Mollygo, In one newspaper he is criticised for smiling, no mention of a possible reason why, he was riding a horse.
The King who owns a large number of properties in Sandringham shouldn’t provide a property for his brother !

Cariad Again
Goodness only knows what's been going on that hasn't come out yet - given that what has come out includes murder, human sacrifice, you name it....

If there's even worse = eeek!!!! Could there be worse than that?!

I've noted the quick "Send in the cavalry" and off came the most "presentable/popular" royal sent off to Wales to wear a Welsh coat, make a fuss of a dog (loads of people have dogs here) and smile at everyone

If you are speaking of The Prince of Wales he is often in Wales,his visits are not arranged in minutes ,

Better the king houses AMW than he makes a claim for social housing benefits. Or that AWM turns to other insalubrious ‘friends’ in his little black book for support.

I am disgusted at the entire Epstein thing, my brain can scarcely take on board the behaviour of so many well-known people. Each time I think we’ve heard it all, worse comes along. It’s a cesspit.

I've noted the quick "Send in the cavalry" and off came the most "presentable/popular" royal sent off to Wales to wear a Welsh coat, make a fuss of a dog (loads of people have dogs here) and smile at everyone.

Not sure who you meant, but surely you do not mean that all the members of a family should be guilty by association?

Allira

^I've noted the quick "Send in the cavalry" and off came the most "presentable/popular" royal sent off to Wales to wear a Welsh coat, make a fuss of a dog (loads of people have dogs here) and smile at everyone.^

Not sure who you meant, but surely you do not mean that all the members of a family should be guilty by association?

Ah, I see that you must be referring to the Princess of Wales.

As all royal visits are months in the planning, your comment is unnecessary and uncalled for.

If you are speaking of The Prince of Wales he is often in Wales,his visits are not arranged in minutes

I think CariadAgain meant the Prince and Princess of Wales and was referring to Catherine's Welsh wool coat.

No, agreed, visits are not arranged in minutes, and what Andrew M-W does should not reflect on other members of the family.

SueDonim Better the king houses AMW than he makes a claim for social housing benefits. Or that AWM turns to other insalubrious ‘friends’ in his little black book for support.

I agree.

King Charles is providing for AMW, not attempting to explain.

I'm not saying he's innocent Casdon, I'm just not prepared to assume his guilt either. I like evidence and allegations, hear say and the photo's of Andrew we have seen are not evidence that he knowingly had sex with sex trafficked females.

Anniebach

*Cariad Again*
Goodness only knows what's been going on that hasn't come out yet - given that what has come out includes murder, human sacrifice, you name it....

If there's even worse = eeek!!!! Could there be worse than that?!

I've noted the quick "Send in the cavalry" and off came the most "presentable/popular" royal sent off to Wales to wear a Welsh coat, make a fuss of a dog (loads of people have dogs here) and smile at everyone

If you are speaking of The Prince of Wales he is often in Wales,his visits are not arranged in minutes ,

Waity Kaity - aka Catherine, the Queen-to-be.

Allira

Allira

I've noted the quick "Send in the cavalry" and off came the most "presentable/popular" royal sent off to Wales to wear a Welsh coat, make a fuss of a dog (loads of people have dogs here) and smile at everyone.

Not sure who you meant, but surely you do not mean that all the members of a family should be guilty by association?

Ah, I see that you must be referring to the Princess of Wales.

As all royal visits are months in the planning, your comment is unnecessary and uncalled for.

Maybe it depends on which particular royal it is. I can recall someone I know saying "We're not supposed to say - but whichever-Royal-it-was will be popping in to our shop in a few weeks time. We've just been told".

Can't remember which particular royal it was - but they were only given a few weeks notice. I was just feeling surprised that he'd turned out to be a royalist - as I wouldnt have thought he was...but he was clearly looking forward to the visit.

What I am saying Smileless2012 is that as the evidence mounts, it becomes less and less likely that he is not guilty. Every day there are new pieces of the Epstein files jigsaw being pieced together, and every one of those pieces stacks up. It’s correct to say that someone is innocent until proved guilty, but the probability that they are increases as the evidence does. I’m not anti royalist by the way, I’m only a realist.