Epstein/Maxwell/Prin ce Andrew

One wrong doesn't make a right, or so I was brought up to believe and nothing in my adult life has changed my belief.

The two cases are not the same. As Oldwoman said, PA is being asked to be interviewed as a witness.

Anne Secolas caused death by dangerous driving, well that is the simplest description I can find for what she did. It doesn't seem to be a situation where I should say "it is alleged that she caused death by dangerous driving". She then left the country, in the full knowledge that the local police wanted to interview her. That is shoddy behaviour by any standard. For the President to shield her stinks.

PA acknowledges he was a friend of J.Epstein. He says that after Epstein served a sentence for sex offences against minors, his "sense of honour" led him to fly to New York and spend 4 nights staying with Epstein. He did this because his sense of honour is such that he couldn't end a friendship with a phone call. The FBI is conducting a thorough investigation into Epstein's behaviour and the behaviour of his friends, as alleged by numerous women. The women share a history of being vulnerable girls, sexually exploited and trafficked it is said, by Epstein and his friend G Maxwell.

I suspect we all understand why these two people, facing very different challenges are taking the same path and refusing to cooperate.

Prince Andrew should agree to be questioned, then he can face them down.
Something along the lines of : " I did not have sex with that woman!"
Then they can pursue their questioning of Clinton, who also appears in photographs at some of Epstein's social events, and other American notables.

I am speaking not of what is the decent thing to do, but the
Americans on tv demanding a Brit answers questions but I doubt there has been any publicity about an American refusing to answer questions .

I agree Galaxy it should be a matter of integrity.

Surely though he should not need to be compelled. A decent person would volunteer to answer questions would they not?

We should want to behave better though, it's not a race to the bottom.

An American can refused to answer questions but a Brit can’t,
One is guilty of a crime, one may be guilty of a crime.

The two cases are completely different. The American woman needs to be questioned as a suspect. Investigators want to question PA as a possible WITNESS - there is a big difference. As I have said before his refusal to meet with them merely adds fire to the rumours he has something to hide.

Thank you Iam so no difference between the two

So far as I know, she is refusing to be questioned at all. that position is supported by her President.

Thank you Iam. Do you know if she has been questioned
by our police in America ? I know the young man’s parents went to America

No Mrs S left the country before the police spoke to her.

Has the woman who killed the young man been questioned
by anyone from this country ?

PA should meet with the investigators face to face - I am sure they would agree to that meeting taking place in UK. They want to question him as a possible witness - not as a suspect. His refusing to meet with them to answer their questions but just sending a prepared statement merely adds to the rumours that he has something to hide.

If she has

If she is as has been suggested a member of the CIA, then different rules will apply than to Windsor.

I’m not saying I agree btw

yes both have questions to answer, but if an American can’t
be forced to come to the U.K. then a Brit can’t be forced to go
to America

I’m not sure that linking the two cases is the right thing to do tbh. Both have questions to answer.

Thank you Chewbacca, so if she can’t be made to come to this country how can Andrew be forced to go to America

Iam64 and Anniebach, forgive me, my post @ 21.19 wasn't entirely accurate. I said that Anne Sacoolas was the wife of a diplomat and was therefore claiming diplomatic immunity so as not to be brought back to the UK and face charges. I've gone back and checked my facts!

Mrs Sacoolas's husband was an American intelligence officer based at RAF Croughton. That gave him a certain level of diplomatic immunity. The British and US governments maintain that this meant that, as his wife, Mrs Sacoolas had immunity too.

This is being disputed by Sir Ivor Roberts due to:

....... a letter of agreement between the Foreign Office and the US ambassador to Britain in August 1995 about the American personnel at RAF Croughton. This says explicitly that diplomatic immunity for people like Mr Sacoolas would not apply for "acts performed outside the course of their duties".
"If Mr Sacoolas wasn't covered for acts outside his duties, Sir Ivor says, it would be absurd for" Mrs Sacoolas, who had no official position, to be immune from prosecution when her husband wasn't.

Perhaps they could do an exchange: Anne Sacoolas for PA. I'd vote for it.

Oh thanks Callistemon
I saw the six o’clock news and that just said her lawyers had applied for bail but it was felt she was a high risk of bolting given her various psssports and great wealth.

The trial is this time next year!

Plenty of time for Andrew to stew !

I thought she had been denied bail.
She then wanted to spend the pre-trial period in a luxury hotel but that was refused too.
At the moment she is in solitary confinement, which should bring her and any supporters some relief as she feared she could catch COVID19 in jail.

Sorry early, not eraly

I don't think I've ever seen so many posts that have been deleted by Gransnet.Is this a record?

Anyway, I have read that G Maxwell is worth around $20 million and would like to know where she got it from because she apparently has had fairly minor jobs. I think we should be told whether this money came from her father whp defrauded the Daily Mirror pension fund, leaving hundreds of employees with little or no pension. (An eraly version of Philip Green)

What are the chances of her being granted bail?

Pretty slim I should think.

When will we hear?