ozimoron

Even if a more virulent strain emerges?

The evidence would have been provided but for P. Andrews lack of cohones.

The photo is not the sum of the evidence provided. It is deceptive to imply that is is. Ex prince Andrew refused to give a deposition to the FBI and refused to confront the evidence in court, preferring to cough up a king's ransom in exchange.

Why baselessly characterise people who just want to follow medical advice? I have not seen a single post where anybody wants to get "as many shots as possible". That's just trolling. All I want to do is get the vaccines as recommended in order to save my life and protect others. I'm quite sure anybody not wearing a tin foil hat feels the same way. I you want to have a respectful debate then give one. My tin foil hat jibe is a response to uour mischaracterisation so you can understand what it does and how it escalates. It is a persistent theme in this debate to ascribe others as having an opinion which doesn't exist. It is irrational to consider that anybody wants to have more shots than is necessary.

not many will believe that

yes, of course. Year 12 biology.

He can't be sacked that's the real ammunition for republicans. Anyway, it's too late, he failed to live up to the standards expected by a spoiled brat of the Crown. He's still a prince. lol

and they will because he failed to defend himself.

If he was innocent they certainly would have advised him to cooperate.

The filed complaint didn't go away because they settled. It just wasn't heard by the court. That doesn't mean it didn't happen and the weight of public opinion remains that it did happen and forever that will be the case. Labour MP Jess Phillips has expressed doubt Andrew could play a constructive role in combating trafficking. "Those who work in sexual violence [and] human trafficking services are certainly not going to have open arms to his allyship... even if it was just finances," she said. Beyond the Streets, a charity working to end sexual exploitation, said it was unlikely it would accept any support offered by Andrew. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-60406159

The jurisdiction matter had already been rejected by a judge. The upcoming civil case was about human trafficking and rape.

Not in a civil case, that is not true. The jury only has to find that the balance of probabilities favoured the complaint. Innocent until proven guilty applies only to a criminal trial.

They have a reputation to protect, but clearly he would rather part with 12 million quid than protect his reputation. Says it all.

The BBC article clearly states that the allegation of human trafficking was made pertinent to the civil suit.

Human trafficking is prostitution.

The complaint included an allegation that she was trafficked and raped, that was clear from the BBC article.

It's a civil court. The jury only needed to be convinced, nothing needed to be proved. He wouldn't stand up to the plate.

Irrelevant, she didn't marry him. My point is that it stretches credulity to think she wasn't compensated.

Right, who would? A girl less than half his age flies from the US to meet him courtesy of a billionaire friend and it slipped his memory? Sheesh.

Ms Giuffre, who was previously known as Virginia Roberts, claimed she was the victim of sex trafficking and abuse by financier Epstein from the age of 16. Epstein died in prison in 2019 while awaiting a sex trafficking trial. She said part of the abuse saw her lent out to powerful men, including Prince Andrew, who is the third child of the Queen and ninth in line to the throne. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-60393843 So this supposedly innocent man allowed his career and fortune be ruined and the royal reputation forever sullied rather than stand up in court and allow the evidence to be aired? How gullible do you need to be to believe that?

Totally irrelevant isn't it? And the answer for me is none.

Do you really believe she received no financial benefit from a billionaire (epstein) and a millionaire who was more than twice her age?

You're ignoring the fact that she was compensated for sex (money changed hands) and that made it illegal.

If you used Thai alphabet then I assume they would.

Stop pretending that somehow what he did wasn't illegal in the UK as well as the USA and just about every country in the world.