[jet]

Of course certain media are going to be more interested in an attractive young couple, especially when the new wife turns out to be a diva who has a knack of stirring the pot and the new husband looks nothing like his usual happy self since marrying her.
And especially when the Sussexes seem to do things to seek attention, good or bad, it doesn't seem to matter....

Put that against a middle aged boring man who we rarely see - and what is there to say about the Andrew situation really, once it is said, it isn't an ongoing saga that brings fresh news often - and there is no evidence yet that the alllegations are even true.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Go there all you want Livia, but this isn't a court, it's a forum, people are allowed to discuss things like interviews and allegations without your blessing..........

You've already reminded me this isn't a court... and no it isn't. Courts try their best to be fair and people are judged only by those with a clue.

If I have a certain perspective because of my job, that doesn't give you the right to take the piss our of me. Go read your own rules.

Everyone's allowed an opinion. And if you want to call someone a paedo with no evidence, crack on. But I will point out there's no evidence. Once there is... different story. And personally, I think Andrew is a sleazy money-grabber. Doesn't automatically make him a paedo.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by jet

Of course certain media are going to be more interested in an attractive young couple, especially when the new wife turns out to be a diva who has a knack of stirring the pot and the new husband looks nothing like his usual happy self since marrying her.
And especially when the Sussexes seem to do things to seek attention, good or bad, it doesn't seem to matter....

Put that against a middle aged boring man who we rarely see - and what is there to say about the Andrew situation really, once it is said, it isn't an ongoing saga that brings fresh news often - and there is no evidence yet that the alllegations are even true.

But he's not cooperating with the US investigation and he can't be made to either so he is never going to be properly investigated. That's where the outrage should be. It seems like it's all been brushed under the carpet

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/01/29/e...cli/index.html

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by jet

- and there is no evidence yet that the alllegations are even true.

Funny that, considering evidence and fact fly out the window when it comes to dragging Meghan through the mud.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Livia

You've already reminded me this isn't a court... and no it isn't. Courts try their best to be fair and people are judged only by those with a clue.

If I have a certain perspective because of my job, that doesn't give you the right to take the piss our of me. Go read your own rules.

Everyone's allowed an opinion. And if you want to call someone a paedo with no evidence, crack on. But I will point out there's no evidence. Once there is... different story. And personally, I think Andrew is a sleazy money-grabber. Doesn't automatically make him a paedo.

[jet]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

But he's not cooperating with the US investigation and he can't be made to either so he is never going to be properly investigated. That's where the outrage should be. It seems like it's all been brushed under the carpet

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/01/29/e...cli/index.html

This says he hasn't been asked...

https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/li...inquiry/29/01/

[Amy Jade]

Come on, Andrew definitely is a dirty peado otherwise he would have gone to the US to help out as much as possible, as would anyone with a clean conscience.

More women are coming forward and the rest will have been gotten to first and paid off.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by jet

This says he hasn't been asked...

https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/li...inquiry/29/01/

All the American articles I've seen say he has been asked and has ignored the request. I mean it seems more likely that he would have been, why wouldn't he?

[Twosugars]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

Funny that, considering evidence and fact fly out the window when it comes to dragging Meghan through the mud.

But but "respected royal correspondents" wrote in the Daily Heil

[jet]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

All the American articles I've seen say he has been asked and has ignored the request. I mean it seems more likely that he would have been, why wouldn't he?

There are lots of articles saying he hasn't as well.
It does seem more likely that he would be asked, yes. It's very confusing.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by jet

This says he hasn't been asked...

https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/li...inquiry/29/01/

Also, that article says "A Source close to Andrew says" not that Andrew has actually said he hadn't been asked.

This article actually directly quotes the lead prosecutor in the inquiry :

But Geoffrey Berman, US attorney and the lead prosecutor in the inquiry, said Monday that the Duke of York has not responded to requests for an interview.

"It's fair for people to know whether Prince Andrew has followed through with that public commitment," said Berman, the US Attorney for the Southern District of New York.
"To date, Prince Andrew has provided zero cooperation."
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/01/29/e...cli/index.html

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Livia

You've already reminded me this isn't a court... and no it isn't. Courts try their best to be fair and people are judged only by those with a clue.

If I have a certain perspective because of my job, that doesn't give you the right to take the piss our of me. Go read your own rules.

Everyone's allowed an opinion. And if you want to call someone a paedo with no evidence, crack on. But I will point out there's no evidence. Once there is... different story. And personally, I think Andrew is a sleazy money-grabber. Doesn't automatically make him a paedo.

Prior to that however the case is considered by a jury of peers of ordinary citizens... like a forum. A judge then delivers a sentence based on that verdict.

[Tom4784]

She's not white and he is. Who cares about a royal peado when you've got a non-white woman not 'knowing her place' in the royal family?

[jet]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Also, that article says "A Source close to Andrew says" not that Andrew has actually said he hadn't been asked.

This article actually directly quotes the lead prosecutor in the inquiry :

But Geoffrey Berman, US attorney and the lead prosecutor in the inquiry, said Monday that the Duke of York has not responded to requests for an interview.

"It's fair for people to know whether Prince Andrew has followed through with that public commitment," said Berman, the US Attorney for the Southern District of New York.
"To date, Prince Andrew has provided zero cooperation."
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/01/29/e...cli/index.html

Can't he be made to co - operate?

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Cherie

and here we have the Harry to Marry thread, where a lot of the people who were really happy for them both are now being told they HATE HER

http://www.thisisbigbrother.com/foru...ht=harry+marry

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Quote me please.. I dont recall making any reference to parasites.

And I didn't say you had said it didn't exist....
People hurl all kinds of abuse on social media, is it a reach then to suggest there has been racist comments made about her, and many are justified in 'coming out of the woodwork' to call that out?

I post the link but now you want me to quote you? find it yourself, the thread is only 6 pages

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by jet

Can't he be made to co - operate?

I have no idea, presumably if he were a "normal" British citizen the US would ask to have him extradited but I don't know about a member of the Royal family, don't they have some sort of diplomatic immunity? I'm really unsure how it would work

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Cherie

I post the link but now you want me to quote you? find it yourself, the thread is only 6 pages

I found it... bit disingenuous of you to allude I referenced only Meghan there, I of course meant the whole royal family. I've not made a secret of the fact I'm not a royalist.

They now do not rely on public funds ergo they are no longer parasites in my eyes.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

I found it... bit disingenuous of you to allude I referenced only Meghan there, I of course meant the whole royal family. I've not made a secret of the fact I'm not a royalist.

They now do not rely on public funds ergo they are no longer parasites in my eyes.

To be fair, the Royals generate more than 3 times what they cost in taxpayers money. Pay for themselves as it were.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Twosugars

But but "respected royal correspondents" wrote in the Daily Heil

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

I found it... bit disingenuous of you to allude I referenced only Meghan there, I of course meant the whole royal family. I've not made a secret of the fact I'm not a royalist.

They now do not rely on public funds ergo they are no longer parasites in my eyes.

err who is paying for their security?

[Twosugars]

Originally Posted by Cherie

[/B]

err who is paying for their security?

Tbf they merit security as royals, it goes with the territory.

Do you know we still pay for security of all former prime ministers?

So yes we pay for example for Cameron to be safe while he sits with his trotters up sunning himself in Nice.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Twosugars

Tbf they merit security as royals, it goes with the territory.

Do you know we still pay for security of all former prime ministers?

So yes we pay for example for Cameron to be safe while he sits with his trotters up sunning himself in Nice.

I am not calling anyone parasites, kizzy is, do follow the thread

I don't care if we pay for their security

[Ammi]

Originally Posted by Amy Jade

all shes done is try to escape a lifestyle that she nor her husband wanted to be in...prince Andrew was best mates with a peado and is looking likely to be one himself yet the media are still more interested in painting Meghan as some sort of super villain

...(...I’ll just go with the ‘are you surprised’ thing, Amy...)...we all watch reality tv we know how it works...in general, I think that females are judged by and to a much higher standard than males...There are other factors with Meghan, I think...

[Twosugars]

Originally Posted by Cherie

I am not calling anyone parasites, kizzy is, do follow the thread

I don't care if we pay for their security

I thought you wanted to actually discuss paying for security not just having a go at Kizzy.

Apologies if I was wrong and interrupted you

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

I found it... bit disingenuous of you to allude I referenced only Meghan there, I of course meant the whole royal family. I've not made a secret of the fact I'm not a royalist.

They now do not rely on public funds ergo they are no longer parasites in my eyes.

Originally Posted by Twosugars

I thought you wanted to actually discuss paying for security not just having a go at Kizzy.

Apologies if I was wrong and interrupted you

I was pointing out her inaccuracy actually