Prince Andrew served with legal papers over sexual assault lawsuit (Telegraph)

Thank you nadatetube.

The High Court has now confirmed that Virginia Giuffre's lawsuit against Prince Andrew will be served.

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/prince-andrew-high-court-to-serve-notice-of-legal-action-by-virginia-giuffre-6v006jhcp

Very good posts Maddyone.^

Is it not possible that like the majority who seek legal advice
the Queen is following legal advice ?

If Andrew was the only member of her family not to visit
Balmoral we would have the headlines

The Queen believes Andrew is guilty

I agree with you Parsley.

I don’t think my life was no different to the Queen’s life Annie. My life was and is very different from the Queen’s. However doing her duty without putting a foot wrong is the same as millions of other people. They do their jobs/duty without putting a foot wrong, but they don’t get others saying as much. The Queen is not better than the rest of us, she’s just doing her job, the same as millions of others. Hers is just somewhat better rewarded.

Maddy were you and your family hitting the headlines daily ?

Your children criticised for their clothes, how they bring up
their family?

Unless anyone has experienced public and media criticism daily how can it be said their lives are no different to the Queen’s ,

maddyone

I’ve always had a foot in both camps but the more I observe, the more I read, the more I think perhaps monarchy had has its day. People say the Queen has done a good job and never put a foot wrong, but so did I as a teacher. Millions do a good job and never put a foot wrong, it’s not an argument.
I cannot help feeling that she’s putting a foot wrong over this Andrew business, and now it seems Charles has put a foot wrong too. I know others will disagree but I really do feel allowing Andrew to avoid justice by hiding on her estates is very much putting a foot wrong. Obviously no one knows, but it wouldn’t surprise me if she’s never even discussed this issue with him. I’ll never know.

I completely agree with you maddyone. The Queen has led a very sheltered life indeed. She didn’t go to school, she is surrounded by a small group of sycophants who bow and curtsy and it is understandable that her decisions are based on her limited knowledge of real life. By following the tradition of keeping a dignified silence when the real world impinges, she is seen as never putting a foot wrong. I would not be surprised if Queen does not fully understand the serious nature of Andrew’s mindless behaviour. However, The High Court is now involved, so regardless of his Royalness, Andrew will have the opportunity of telling his side of the story. The Queen need not be involved at all.

They’re both jobs Annie except that the Queen’s job comes with exceptional privileges.

Can being Queen be compared with being a teacher, a book keeper, a nurse ?

All given honours are decided by honours committees

I’ve always had a foot in both camps but the more I observe, the more I read, the more I think perhaps monarchy had has its day. People say the Queen has done a good job and never put a foot wrong, but so did I as a teacher. Millions do a good job and never put a foot wrong, it’s not an argument.
I cannot help feeling that she’s putting a foot wrong over this Andrew business, and now it seems Charles has put a foot wrong too. I know others will disagree but I really do feel allowing Andrew to avoid justice by hiding on her estates is very much putting a foot wrong. Obviously no one knows, but it wouldn’t surprise me if she’s never even discussed this issue with him. I’ll never know.

Charles gave honours for money and a Russian gave over a million thoses people don't give money for nothing. Hundreds of republicans me included, have written to their MP about this scandal Rich Tory donors have also been found to be buying access to Charles.

And

In 2013 Republic gave written evidence to the Public Accounts Committee, challenging the Duchy's claim it doesn't have to pay Corporation Tax. See page 36 of the report here at publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201314/cmselect/cmpubacc/475/475.pdf…
The committee was not impressed with the Duchy.
theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/nov/05/duchy-of-cornwall-tax-prince-wales-charles

Following lobbying by Republic and hundreds of our members writing to their MPs, the Public Accounts Committee investigated the Duchy of Cornwall's taxes in 2013. They weren't impressed with what they found.

Charles still doesn't pay capital gains tax or corporation tax
As a landlord tennents who own houses on Duchy can't buy their land which is law now.

And with the dodgy people he has been close friends with over the years do monarchists want him as our representative our Head of State?

In the mad rush to defend our glorious Heir to the Throne, some facts are getting missed here...

Two instances have come to light in recent weeks of "dubious" donations to the Princes Foundation. One has been given back. None of it was HRH's money, but he was more than happy to thank the people who made the donations and even give one a CBE.

One dubious donation is bad luck, two is a coincidence....if there's another, that's starting to look like a pattern.

His money started his charities

Surely the President is allowed (even expected) to make a generous donation? Other donors would be a bit peeved if he didn't put his money where his mouth was.

Charles set up the charity , as he did The Princes Trust, he is not a patron he is President.

Is Charles a patron of the charity? I believe one of the uses of patrons is to give generous donations. I have heard criticisms from people who haven't heard that royalty have actually donated financially to the charities of which they are patrons. Seems to me we can't complain that charities don't get any financial benefit from royal patrons and also complain that they do.

Grany

The High Court says it will now take steps to notify Prince Andrew about civil action being brought against him in New York after accepting a request by Ms Giuffre's lawyers to formally contact the Duke of York about the proceedings.

At last. Surely Prince Andrew can’t continue to avoid the issue now.

So Charles raises money and then the charity says ‘no thanks’ after ethics committee has a look at the donor. Note that Charles is neither an employee or trustee, but he treats the charity as ‘his’ and then gets it into a lot of hot water.

TODAY: Prince Charles' charity chairman quits, expressing concerns over ‘six-figure donation’ after claims made about donations to ⁦@PrincesFound⁩ itv.com/news/2021-09-15/charles-charity-chairman-quits-expressing-concerns-over-six-figure-donation

The High Court says it will now take steps to notify Prince Andrew about civil action being brought against him in New York after accepting a request by Ms Giuffre's lawyers to formally contact the Duke of York about the proceedings.

I know who came and she made the right decision

Anniebach

Thank you for your contribution to the families of Aberfan
Petra , I assume you watch The Crown and believed the lies.

Yes Harold Wilson took money from us and 20 years later Tony Blair gave it back.

We had many visits to Buck house gardens and to Highgrove in
the years following.

I have never seen an episode of The Crown.

It took her more than a week to go, she sent Lord Snowden and Prince Philip almost immediately

Thank you for your contribution to the families of Aberfan
Petra , I assume you watch The Crown and believed the lies.

Yes Harold Wilson took money from us and 20 years later Tony Blair gave it back.

We had many visits to Buck house gardens and to Highgrove in
the years following.

It wasn't any of the Republicans who suggested that at her age, it was appropriate for Charles to have a say in things. If her advanced age makes it appropriate for her son to have a say in things then there must be some concern for her ability to make the right decision.

Serving us all her life might mean making way for somebody else.

JenniferEccles she has barely put a foot wrong over the years.

While that is probably true I have to admit - being old enough to remember Aberfan - that was the first time I could not understand her behaviour.

To be fair she wasn't the only person - apart from the obvious NCB, the Wilson government took money out of the disaster relief fund for the cleanup of the slagheaps. A fund which I as a schoolchild, and probably many of you, contributed to with my pocket money in the belief the money would go to the families.

Currently she has secured exemptions to Scottish law for her land (The Heat Networks Bill) because she is entitled to be 'given sight of legislation which affects her interests'. This, as I understand, is not a public procedure and only came to light due to a FOI request.

Why should the Queen step down?
She’s perfectly sound in mind and body and vowed to serve us all her life.

She is much loved and respected around the world as well as here, and surely, even the Republicans among you must agree that she has barely put a foot wrong over the years.

How she managed to give birth to such an unpleasant, arrogant character as Andrew, is another matter.