Epstein/Maxwell/Prin ce Andrew

Poor Queen.

Yes, her life doesn't seem to get any easier, does it?

Another Annus Horribilis

I agree too MissA; it's all very sordid and I reckon some very well known names must be quaking in their boots.

Poor Queen?WTAF. She has gone out of way to support this sorry excuse for a man since the story broke - deliberately photographed going to church with him. (Oh the irony) and then horse riding. Where’s her judgement? She’s past it.

She is supporting her son. He isn't charged with anything, and I doubt he will be.

He's her son, of course she doesn't want to believe the worst of him. Do other Gransnetters automatically believe the worst of their children/grandchildren? Or do they adopt that human frailty of hoping it's a big mistake? And do remember nothing has been proved yet, I assume we all believe innocent until proved guilty? I have strong suspicions, but my suspicions are just that, suspicions. If I have strong suspicions about other gransnetters am I permitted to state them as "facts"?

And the whole "past it" is just vile! At what age are we to be judged "past it"? 60-70-80-90 and who gets to judge?

My friend told me years ago about all this, and I thought she was off her rocker, but it's coming to light, bit by bit.

The Queen will have been aware from the very beginning of Andrews unpleasant habits.

Security will have constantly reported back to BP.

I think that Windsor is almost certainly quite a small fish. The FBI have bigger ones to fry.

suziewoozie people muse and wonder because they don’t
know it all

At what age does a mother become ‘past it being a mother ‘ ?

She’s past it.

WTAF Sooziewuzie? You, such a vocal critic of misogyny and discrimination have actually just said that an older woman is "past it"?

Suziewoozie OH my goodness did you just criticise the queen on GN ? ??

No, suzie criticised an older woman.

and then horse riding how dare she at her age! ???

It's ageist - and on Gransnet of all places

Janipat
If I have strong suspicions about other gransnetters am I permitted to state them as "facts"

Some GN’s do exactly that unfortunately; to the extent of commenting on non existent posts. It’s this type of behaviour that concerns me. Thank goodness we have courts of law where evidence is heard and questions asked and answers demanded.

People lie for all sorts of reasons known only to themselves.

You would think though that if you had a son you knew was inclined to dubious and questionable practices, and you had the financial ability, you would make sure that he had security around him who would step in and remove him, or notify you, when he was involved with dodgy people. Unless of course you regarded the young women being abused as either expendable or asking for it.

suziewoozie

Poor Queen?WTAF. She has gone out of way to support this sorry excuse for a man since the story broke - deliberately photographed going to church with him. (Oh the irony) and then horse riding. Where’s her judgement? She’s past it.

If you had a son whom you loved very much who assured you that his reported misdemeanors were all a pack of lies and that the press were 'out to get him because of who he is' you might just be inclined to believe him.

Obviously now I think his mother may be realising that there could be something to this, although so difficult for a mother to come to terms with, and he's been removed from royal duties.

Love can't be turned on and off like a tap, suzie, - mothers may dislike what their child has allegedly done but still love that child.
And hope hat none of the allegations are true.

Message deleted by Gransnet. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

trisher I do wonder where his security people were.

However, having met people who knew him years ago and who served with him, I have heard reports about what a nasty, pompous, arrogant man he is.

I do think though Callistemon that you can't remove from the Queen /PA relationship the fact that she thinks she is 'special'. She will not retire because she believes in this 'specialness'. It therefore follows that her children are 'special'. So things that the rest of us may regard as unacceptable become something that is just part of that. I don't think she needs to believe he is innocent only that the law isn't applicable, he is above it, and the girls don't really matter.

Message deleted by Gransnet. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Callistemon. Totally agree re the loving your son in spite of possible crimes, the difference is being queen and showing PUBLIC support which was possibly ill judged
I don’t think suzie was criticising the horse riding per se.

I am neither angry nor hysterical.

Ask for my post to be deleted if it offends you tb

Lucca

Callistemon. Totally agree re the loving your son in spite of possible crimes, the difference is being queen and showing PUBLIC support which was possibly ill judged
I don’t think suzie was criticising the horse riding per se.

Yes, it was ill-judged.
But I should imagine he threw himself on her mercy and claimed it was all a pack of lies and the press were out to get him. She seems to have a blind spot where he is concerned.

I'd feel sorry for any mother of whatever age, public figure or not, who found herself in such a dilemma over a beloved child.