Disgraced Prince Andrew heckled at Queen Elizabeth’s funeral procession

[Chomper Higgot]

4 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

You reap what you sow.

 

You wanted it when it suited your agenda. You'll have to live with it when it doesn't.

I look forward to you providing examples to back up that assertion.

[JonnyF]

58 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

As I said, lets not compare someone who has had sex with at least one trafficked woman [and rather than face a public trial settled out of court despite saying he would fight the case in court], with hate speech against sections of society because of their sexual orientation, gender, ethnicity or gender identity.

 

Once again you are trying to use language to divert from the real issue. Any protest against one of your groups is "hate speech", yet any protest aginst groups you dislike is "freedom of expression".

 

 

[Liverpool Lou]

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Andrew is credibly accused of sex crimes.

Really? There are criminal charges outstanding against him?  Where?

[billd766]

2 hours ago, jak2002003 said:

It's crazy.  Uk is getting like here now. Not allowed to protest, not allowed to say anything negative about UK royalty.  

Not true at all.

 

Whilst they have the right to express their feelings, so do millions of other people have the right to express their condolences and their feelings.

 

Now if they can manage to do that, quietly and peacefully as they did, what right have the moaners and whiners to disrupt them?

[Jai Dee]

An off-topic troll post and several replies have been removed.

[Bluespunk]

35 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Once again you are trying to use language to divert from the real issue. Any protest against one of your groups is "hate speech", yet any protest aginst groups you dislike is "freedom of expression".

 

 

I don't have groups, and despite your attempts to deny it, my meaning was perfectly clear.

 

No diversion, just exposing it...

[chalawaan]

4 hours ago, JonnyF said:

There is a time and a place for everything.

 

Heckling a man who is attending his mother's funeral is an incredibly low thing to do.

 

Besides, the money grabber Guiffre was of legal age when she claims to have had consenual sex with Andrew for money, and herself admitted to help traffick other girls for sexual purposes. 

1. You seem to be legally unqualified to speak in his royal nonces defence. And he still had to pay in more ways than one, in spite of the best defence money can buy!

2. Anyone else would be in jail and NOT ALLOWED to be at their mothers funeral to begin with. If he had any shame or decency, he would have stayed away, and paid his respects after hours. 

3. Unlike bees, The Queen is not in any way biologically above the rest of us, they are all where they are because we accept them being there, when all the BS is stripped away, it's really all there is to it. 

[JonnyF]

5 minutes ago, chalawaan said:

1. You seem to be legally unqualified to speak in his royal nonces defence. And he still had to pay in more ways than one, in spite of the best defence money can buy!

2. Anyone else would be in jail and NOT ALLOWED to be at their mothers funeral to begin with. If he had any shame or decency, he would have stayed away, and paid his respects after hours. 

3. Unlike bees, The Queen is not in any way biologically above the rest of us, they are all where they are because we accept them being there, when all the BS is stripped away, it's really all there is to it. 

Addressing each point in turn.

 

1.   I am not sure why you refer to Andrew as a 'nonce' when he hasn't even been accused of doing anything untoward with underage girls, let alone convicted of such a crime.

2.  In jail for what crime? Having paid, consensual sex with someone of legal age? It would appear that it is YOUR legal credentials that are somewhat lacking.

3.  Given the laws here in Thailand, I would be very careful if I were you.

[chalawaan]

13 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Addressing each point in turn.

 

1.   I am not sure why you refer to Andrew as a 'nonce' when he hasn't even been accused of doing anything untoward with underage girls, let alone convicted of such a crime.

2.  In jail for what crime? Having paid, consensual sex with someone of legal age? It would appear that it is YOUR legal credentials that are somewhat lacking.

3.  Given the laws here in Thailand, I would be very careful if I were you.

Maybe you didn't see the video of him and his own daughter at the gates of Balmoral? If that's appropriate and 'accidental' given everything known and in front of the world press, you're in denial.

Guiffres win and Maxwell's jail time is NOT indicative of consensual sex.

More fawning royalist denial from you.

Members of HM forces even wrote to the Queen in protest. 

What has a widely known unjust and highly abused Thai law got to do with this thread? Is that a threat?

If it is, try harder. 

[JonnyF]

Just now, chalawaan said:

Maybe you didn't see the video of him and his own daughter at the gates of Balmoral? If that's appropriate and 'accidental' given everything known and in front of the world press, you're in denial.

Guiffres win and Maxwell's jail time is NOT indicative of consensual sex.

More fawning royalist denial from you.

What has a widely known unjust and highly abused Thai law got to do with this thread? Is that a threat?

If it is, try harder. 

I didn't see it, but I just watched it. Looked accidental to me, I highly doubt he would do that on purpose in front of the world's cameras. The fact remains though, he has never been proven guilty of underage sex (or even accused of it in any legal sense to my knowledge) so referring to him as a nonce is inappropriate and potentially defamatory. I'm surprised it is allowed on here to be honest.

 

The only thing Guifree won was some money from someone who didn't want his name dragged through the mud at a time that his mother was very close to her death. She was quite happy to forgo justice in a court of law for some quick cash, although what do you expect from a self confessed sex trafficker and prostitute? Believe her if you wish to, I do not.

 

As far as I can see, Andrew is potentially 'guilty' of paying a prostitute for sex, nothing else.

 

As for Thai law, no threat from me. Just friendly advice to read up on it.

 

 

 

 

[VocalNeal]

58 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

As far as I can see, Andrew is potentially 'guilty' of paying a prostitute for sex, nothing else.

Agree. Had he been in Indonesia it would have been legal. It is only US based people who seem to be crying foul???? Or people who have not seen the real world.

[roo860]

3 hours ago, CharlieH said:

 

He's lucky the police got to him, there was a couple of guys there who were ready to nail him.

[transam]

1 hour ago, chalawaan said:

Maybe you didn't see the video of him and his own daughter at the gates of Balmoral? If that's appropriate and 'accidental' given everything known and in front of the world press, you're in denial.

Guiffres win and Maxwell's jail time is NOT indicative of consensual sex.

More fawning royalist denial from you.

Members of HM forces even wrote to the Queen in protest. 

What has a widely known unjust and highly abused Thai law got to do with this thread? Is that a threat?

If it is, try harder. 

I think you have a kinky mind, chap, looking for something that isn't there.

Plus, I suppose you NEVER fooled around wiv girlies when you were younger...............................................????

[Chomper Higgot]

3 hours ago, Liverpool Lou said:

Really? There are criminal charges outstanding against him?  Where?

I didn’t say he was charged, I said he was credibly accused:

 

https://www.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/2015_0102_epsteindershowitz.pdf

[Chomper Higgot]

3 hours ago, JonnyF said:

Addressing each point in turn.

 

1.   I am not sure why you refer to Andrew as a 'nonce' when he hasn't even been accused of doing anything untoward with underage girls, let alone convicted of such a crime.

2.  In jail for what crime? Having paid, consensual sex with someone of legal age? It would appear that it is YOUR legal credentials that are somewhat lacking.

3.  Given the laws here in Thailand, I would be very careful if I were you.

He was accused, refer my post above with link to court filing (an accusation placed before the court).

[billd766]

5 hours ago, billd766 said:

Not true at all.

 

Whilst they have the right to express their feelings, so do millions of other people have the right to express their condolences and their feelings.

 

Now if they can manage to do that, quietly and peacefully as they did, what right have the moaners and whiners to disrupt them?

There is a right time and a right place for protests like those.

 

That was neither the right time or the right place.

4 hours ago, chalawaan said:

1. You seem to be legally unqualified to speak in his royal nonces defence. And he still had to pay in more ways than one, in spite of the best defence money can buy!

2. Anyone else would be in jail and NOT ALLOWED to be at their mothers funeral to begin with. If he had any shame or decency, he would have stayed away, and paid his respects after hours. 

3. Unlike bees, The Queen is not in any way biologically above the rest of us, they are all where they are because we accept them being there, when all the BS is stripped away, it's really all there is to it. 

Are YOU legally qualified to speak on the subject?

 

It was HIS Mother that had died and not yours, any problems between them would have been sorted out, as it seems that they were, without your "help".

 

Death is a time for forgiveness and not a time for other people to shove their unwanted opinions out to all and sundry.

 

I suspect, but I have no real idea, that if you had asked the majority of the people who WERE there, you may find that the majority were happy, or at least had no comment about Prince Andrew being there for his Mother.

 

My Mum decades ago told me that if you can't say any good about a person, it is best to keep quiet.

 

quote "The Queen is not in any way biologically above the rest of us, they are all where they are because we accept them being there,"

 

BTW

Less of the "we" please, because you certainly don't speak for me, nor do I believe that you speak for millions of other people in the UK, or even worldwide.

[billd766]

4 hours ago, chalawaan said:

Maybe you didn't see the video of him and his own daughter at the gates of Balmoral? If that's appropriate and 'accidental' given everything known and in front of the world press, you're in denial.

Guiffres win and Maxwell's jail time is NOT indicative of consensual sex.

More fawning royalist denial from you.

Members of HM forces even wrote to the Queen in protest. 

What has a widely known unjust and highly abused Thai law got to do with this thread? Is that a threat?

If it is, try harder. 

So What?

 

quote "Members of HM forces even wrote to the Queen in protest." 

 

Please tell all of us exactly how many of all the millions of serving and ex-service men and women actually wrote to the Queen in protest?

 

Then compare that to all the ex-servicemen and women who willingly renewed their oath of allegiance to the new King.

 

I certainly did.

[jak2002003]

6 hours ago, Liverpool Lou said:

No, the UK is not "getting like here", protesting is permitted in the UK, just as free speech is.  Those who were arrested in the UK were initially arrested for public order offences, not for protesting or having an opinion.

It is very difficult to protest now..and will get harder if the government get it's way.   If people are protesting and the police consider it is upsetting people, now they can make arrears and stop the protest. 

[jak2002003]

31 minutes ago, billd766 said:

So What?

 

quote "Members of HM forces even wrote to the Queen in protest." 

 

Please tell all of us exactly how many of all the millions of serving and ex-service men and women actually wrote to the Queen in protest?

 

Then compare that to all the ex-servicemen and women who willingly renewed their oath of allegiance to the new King.

 

I certainly did.

Why? What do you think he will do for you?  Do you think he cares about you or give you a second though? 

[billd766]

21 minutes ago, jak2002003 said:

Why? What do you think he will do for you?  Do you think he cares about you or give you a second though? 

He will do nothing for me. I just like pinning people down when they post trash and ask them why. 9 times out of 10 they have no reply, or it is only my opinion.

 

But their opinion does not speak for me, nor does it speak for other people even though they believe it does.

[JonnyF]

4 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

He was accused, refer my post above with link to court filing (an accusation placed before the court).

Accusing someone of having underage sex with a 17 year old in England where the age of consent is 16 is laughable. It’s like accusing someone who is 19 years of buying alcohol illegally when the minimum age is 18. 

 

I could accuse you of being a 300 year old space alien. Then file it with the court. Does that make you a 300 year old space Alien? People make accusations all the time for various reasons. Guilt in a court of law means something. 
 

Not an accusation by a self confessed   sex trafficking prostitute who claims it’s nothing to do with the money before swiftly dropping all charges for a few million quid.

[bendejo]

Those poor dogs!

 

[thaibeachlovers]

16 hours ago, VocalNeal said:

I'd say removed for his own protection. 

 

Is there any evidence that he was actually arrested????

From the vdo posted after that post: he was apparently lucky the cops "rescued" him. He'd have been really done if the cop hadn't moved him on.

I'll refrain from describing him on here, but it wouldn't be complimentary.

It wasn't just one shout- he was apparently ranting on and upsetting everyone around him that were there to pay respects to the Queen.

[thaibeachlovers]

12 hours ago, transam said:

I think you have a kinky mind, chap, looking for something that isn't there.

Plus, I suppose you NEVER fooled around wiv girlies when you were younger...............................................????

You are IMO being charitable. I'd have mentioned something about gutters.

 

Given certain elements of the press's desire to muck rake, anything, even innocent, that looked suspicious would be all over the headlines in large type.

I take it that that was not so.

[thaibeachlovers]

9 hours ago, jak2002003 said:

It is very difficult to protest now..and will get harder if the government get it's way.   If people are protesting and the police consider it is upsetting people, now they can make arrears and stop the protest. 

Was he arrested? Is there a court case?

Looked to me like he was just being moved on for his own safety.

[Atlantis]

17 hours ago, JonnyF said:

Once again you are trying to use language to divert from the real issue. Any protest against one of your groups is "hate speech", yet any protest aginst groups you dislike is "freedom of expression".

 

 

Exactly.

 

When some have no where to go and yet still want to save face, yelling “hate speech!” is too often the last act of desperation.

 

Veer too close to totally dismantling their positions, and instinctive cries of (pick one or more) racism / transphobia / islamophobia etc come gushing out.

At the same time: guy heckling during a funeral procession - not hateful at all. Nope.

 

Sometimes, you just have to feel sorry for them and move. Instinctive defense mechanism at this point.

[herfiehandbag]

21 hours ago, jak2002003 said:

It's crazy.  Uk is getting like here now. Not allowed to protest, not allowed to say anything negative about UK royalty.  

Perhaps you exaggerate slightly?

 

The fellow in Edinburgh was arrested for behaviour likely to cause a breach of the peace. I can't offhand think of any behaviour more likely to cause a breach of the peace than standing in a large crowd of mourners as the Queen's coffin is carried in procession through the streets and shouting at one of her sons!

 

There has been, is, and will be ample opportunity and channels for them and others to make their views known on the subject of Prince Andrew and the monarchy in general. This is no more than attention seeking, they know that they will almost certainly cause a breach of the peace and are setting out to do just that.

[simple1]

19 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I support freedom where it is not using/promoting hate or deliberately spreading harmful lies and misinformation.

 

But you have a difference of opinion that does not involve harm to others, I’ll gladly debate it, as I often do.

 

That aside the current government has enacted laws and is moving to enact more laws that severely restrict the right to protest and freedom of expression.

 

That’s a threat that is currently underway.

 

 

What are the relevant enacted laws by the current government and what are being reviewed for enactment?

 

Regards the OP I assume the man was arrested / removed for disrupting an Official Government Event. So far as I know nothing incorrect with the response.

[Chomper Higgot]

15 minutes ago, simple1 said:

What are the relevant enacted laws by the current government and what are being reviewed for enactment?

https://www.libertyhumanrights.org.uk/advice_information/pcsc-policing-act-protest-rights/

[JonnyF]

15 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

He was accused, refer my post above with link to court filing (an accusation placed before the court).

He was never accused of having sex with underage girls, because by her own admission she was 17 years old at the time and the legal age of consent in the location that the alleged event took place is 16 years old.