Disgraced Prince Andrew heckled at Queen Elizabeth’s funeral procession

[Chomper Higgot]

4 hours ago, transam said:

Not really bright.......????

 

Hey, what he does is his business, not someone who seems to envy those with money....

Now what was he charged with by the Law....?

I wouldn’t describe someone who had to go begging £15,000 of a guy running a brothel in order to pay off his ex-wife’s debts as ‘someone with money’.

 

https://www.newsweek.com/sarah-fergusons-money-troubles-prince-andrews-jeffrey-epstein-1473562

 

[Chomper Higgot]

3 hours ago, Sparktrader said:

Correct. I bet the heckler isnt sin free. Probably a grub in real life himself.

 

Glass houses anyone?????

 

If I was Andrew I'd go live in Asia. Get a nice gf enjoy life. Take 2 bodyguards if you have to.

 

 

Asia is a possibility he could choose.

 

The United States is not.

[DezLez]

8 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

No I have not.

 

But I’m not sure how that relates to him being bright, unless of course you are suggesting his family name had no bearing.

 

I will put this in very simple English for you.

 

If you are not bright , by which I assume you are relating to intelligence and not light bulb illumination, then you would not be bright enough, or in my language, intelligent enough to fly a helicopter.

 

It might help your "discussion points" if you stuck to facts in the public domain rather than conjecture and made up psychoanalysis!

 

[Chomper Higgot]

7 minutes ago, DezLez said:

I will put this in very simple English for you.

 

If you are not bright , by which I assume you are relating to intelligence and not light bulb illumination, then you would not be bright enough, or in my language, intelligent enough to fly a helicopter.

 

It might help your "discussion points" if you stuck to facts in the public domain rather than conjecture and made up psychoanalysis!

 

Again, I’m not sure flying a helicopter is evidence of intellect.

 

Hand eye coordination, spatial awareness maybe, I suspect having the right family name helps with being given the opportunity.

 

Sorry, I’m not buying helicopter flying as an indication of intelligence.

 

You need to look-up the meaning of ‘psychoanalysis’.

 

 

[Gottfrid]

1 hour ago, transam said:

????................Sooooo funny, but a bit boring, are you a Vicar, by any chance.................????

PS. Respect can be given at any age, ol' chap.....????

Vicar? What does religion have to do with this? Are you muslim by any chance? They usually drag religion, as an excuse, into all they do or say.

Yes, respect has nothing to do with age. But, it has to do with what you call people, what name you put on them and how that refers to how you look upon them. Something you clearly failed. So, no respect here. By the way, seen any more dinos lately?

[Bluespunk]

Hmm…now here’s a thing

 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/sep/13/prince-andrew-epstein-sexual-abuse-investigation?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

[VocalNeal]

2 hours ago, Gottfrid said:

Vicar? What does religion have to do with this?

I think he means you sound prudish. Now, not all vicars are prudish and some are women. But I believe that is the sentiment. Nothing to do with religion.

Please feel free to waffle on.

[puchooay]

3 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

It’s owned by Hienz and made in The Netherlands.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/HP_Sauce

I was referring to the sauce itself and the name. British recipe and staple of British food. 

 

Sorry, just a bit of patriotism. ????????

[puchooay]

7 hours ago, roo860 said:

The factory was in Aston, Birmingham. Worked nights on the Aston Expressway, that smell was heavenly!????

I did say "created".

[Woof999]

3 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Have sex with a trafficked 17 year old American and it becomes a matter for US law, I have already provided you one of the applicable statutes.

... and as others have stated numerous times, he was never charged let alone convicted. Perhaps a large part of the problem lies with the US justice system whereby he never saw his day in court for an offense that you seem to believe he was 100% guilty of?

 

Most of the world live in an era where you are innocent until proven guilty. Imagine what a world it would be if it were the other way around.

 

Again, as many others have stated, the chap with the mouth is very much entitled to his opinion, but to voice it so publicly during the ceremony of his mother's death (the Queen no less) showed that he has zero class. He insulted the memory of the Queen to get his moment in the spotlight. Scum.

[Gottfrid]

8 hours ago, VocalNeal said:

I think he means you sound prudish. Now, not all vicars are prudish and some are women. But I believe that is the sentiment. Nothing to do with religion.

Please feel free to waffle on.

vicar

[ˈvɪkə]

 

NOUN

1. (in the Church of England) an incumbent of a parish where tithes formerly passed to a chapter or religious house or layperson. Compare with rector.
   • (in other Anglican Churches) a member of the clergy deputizing for another
   • (in the Roman Catholic Church) a representative or deputy of a bishop.
   • (in the US Episcopal Church) a member of the clergy in charge of a chapel.
   • a cleric or choir member appointed to sing certain parts of a cathedral service.

    

   And Please feel free to make the word mean something that you just made up. So, who is holding the waffle now?

[2baht]

12 hours ago, Liverpool Lou said:

That's where you're wrong, he, very specifically, did not make any admission of guilt, that was part of the settlement.  You're interpretation of the settlement is an opinion that you're entitled to but you're opinion is not fact in that case.

Why then was a settlement necessary, for what?

[Mike Teavee]

On 9/13/2022 at 8:56 AM, 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. 

As much as I detest the "Man" you are absolutely right, nobody should have to take that sort of abuse when attending their mother's funeral.  

 

As an aside, it was interesting to see that he was the only (Male) Royal not wearing military uniform at the funeral, a bit of a shame as he did (very) active service in the Falklands.  

 

 

 

[JonnyF]

14 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

There are many reasons why people are not charged under Federal Law, especially rich, powerful, well connected people.

 

This has no bearing on ‘credible accusation’.

Sounds like Salem in 1692.

 

No need for proof, no need for due process -  just tarnish their name and punish because "he looks guilty".

[Chomper Higgot]

3 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Sounds like Salem in 1692.

 

No need for proof, no need for due process -  just tarnish their name and punish because "he looks guilty".

Sounds more like some rich guy with connections buying his way out of having to face ‘Discovery’ and provide a ‘Deposition under oath’.

Which is what it was.

 

 

[JonnyF]

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

Sounds more like some rich guy with connections buying his way out of having to face ‘Discovery’ and provide a ‘Deposition under oath’.

Which is what it was.

 

 

People settle out of court all the times, for various reasons.

 

He made no admission of guilt.

 

Maybe you are a tad biased against the British Monarchy? I know it's a bugbear for some that not every country can have such rich history and traditions...

[James105]

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Sounds more like some rich guy with connections buying his way out of having to face ‘Discovery’ and provide a ‘Deposition under oath’.

Which is what it was.

 

 

Indeed, and where did he even find the money to pay for this settlement?  He didn't have the money himself so it must have come via the Queen via the grant she receives from the UK treasury, which in turn comes from the taxpayer, which is a particularly nauseating aspect of this whole thing.  

[James105]

2 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

People settle out of court all the times, for various reasons.

 

He made no admission of guilt.

 

Maybe you are a tad biased against the British Monarchy? I know it's a bugbear for some that not every country can have such rich history and traditions...

I have a bugbear about the British monarchy.   Normally I don't care about them but since the media has seen fit to ignore every single other important issue going on right now in favour of devoting almost 100% of coverage on a story about a 96 year old dying of natural causes I am struggling not to be irritated by them.   In a presidential system if a 96 year old ex-president dies, the country doesn't need to grind to a halt, the football can still go ahead and there isn't 24 hour coverage of the event for 2 weeks straight.   Also, if the law of the land states that inheritance tax needs to be paid over a certain amount then the presidents kids would have to pay it, just like everyone else.    

 

I just don't get how people can idolise these people.   What talent do they even have that earns this idolisation?  It's all a bit of a mystery to me.    History doesn't go anywhere, it will still be there.   Tourists will still come to see the palaces and castles, just as they do in France.  I cannot think of a single good reason why the monarchy system should continue.  

[transam]

14 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

What you do/have done is a matter for British law.

 

Have sex with a trafficked 17 year old American and it becomes a matter for US law, I have already provided you one of the applicable statutes.

So what did they charge him with....?

 

It is pretty sad that a British bloke has been delving into U.S. Law to try and bury a British Prince, you are just having yet another dig at your country.

 

I find your actions a total disgrace, especially to the majority of British chap's on this forum.

 

Finally, again, what was Prince Andrew charged with....?

[JonnyF]

Just now, James105 said:

I have a bugbear about the British monarchy.   Normally I don't care about them but since the media has seen fit to ignore every single other important issue going on right now in favour of devoting almost 100% of coverage on a story about a 96 year old dying of natural causes I am struggling not to be irritated by them.   In a presidential system if a 96 year old ex-president dies, the country doesn't need to grind to a halt, the football can still go ahead and there isn't 24 hour coverage of the event for 2 weeks straight.   Also, if the law of the land states that inheritance tax needs to be paid over a certain amount then the presidents kids would have to pay it, just like everyone else.    

 

I just don't get how people can idolise these people.   What talent do they even have that earns this idolisation?  It's all a bit of a mystery to me.    History doesn't go anywhere, it will still be there.   Tourists will still come to see the palaces and castles, just as they do in France.  I cannot think of a single good reason why the monarchy system should continue.  

It's an imperfect system no doubt. However, just like Democracy being imperfect, it's better than the other forms of government IMO. If we were a Republic there's every chance we'd end up with someone like Blair as President. Look at France with Macron. The US with Biden for gods sake. Is that any better?

 

I also agree that shutting down sport was inappropriate. But I don't believe that the decision of the family. That was down to the broadcasters, the Premier League, the BBB of C etc. I mean, the rugby and the cricket was still on, very weird. I was back in the UK last week for a short holiday and was looking forward to the PL games, Shield vs Marshall etc. so I was annoyed when it was all cancelled. But I don't believe the Queen would have supported that. Apart from the sport, things were pretty normal, pubs and clubs open. The TV coverage was OTT but again that was down to the broadcasters, not an edict from the family. 

 

I certainly don't idolize them as individuals either. I had an awful lot of respect for the Queen, Charles is OK when he's not lecturing on the climate, Anne is OK, I like William and Kate, not a fan of Andrew, have disdain for Meghan's husband. But on the whole they perform a function and I do believe that the scenes of the funeral, the pomp etc. will be a positive image for the country. Certainly better than anything else coming out of the place right now. 

 

I also believe they pay for themselves in terms of revenue generated but I think those numbers are difficult to quantify. I genuinely believe that most of the rest of the world looks upon us with a degree of envy compared to what those countries have in place. I know here in Thailand they have a great interest in our Royal family and I get asked about it a lot by colleagues in the office, they always have questions about which one is my favourite etc. In contrast, they mock Trump and Biden. Never even heard of Macron.

[herfiehandbag]

2 hours ago, 2baht said:

Why then was a settlement necessary, for what?

Well if I may be blunt, to shut up a persistent gold digging raddled old tart, who,now that her looks had gone, was forced to find more inventive ways to screw men for money; and thus avoid her dragging the Queen's second son (prat as he may be) into her corner of the gutter during the last month's of Her Majesty's life.

[herfiehandbag]

11 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

Hmm…now here’s a thing

 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/sep/13/prince-andrew-epstein-sexual-abuse-investigation?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

I should imagine that prosecutor is very dismayed that his attempt to drag Prince Andrew in front of him in. New York court did not come off. Prosecuting high profile cases in the American judicial system is often the gateway to judicial eminence or a political career.

 

Firstly blaming the British establishment for that failure would be better received in New York (and in the Guardian for that matter) than would admitting that there wasn't really any evidence.

 

Secondly, given Epstein's somewhat suspicious demise whilst in custody, is anyone surprised that there was a reluctance to deliver Prince Andrew to the New York judicial process?

 

Incidentally I note that he was subsequently sacked as a prosecutor...

[James105]

8 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

If we were a Republic there's every chance we'd end up with someone like Blair as President. Look at France with Macron. The US with Biden for gods sake. Is that any better?

And if Charles turns out to be equivalent or worse than any of those you mentioned and brings embarrassment on the UK which then in turn affects tourism?  What system or law is there in place to remove him from office? 

[JonnyF]

Just now, James105 said:

And if Charles turns out to be equivalent or worse than any of those you mentioned and brings embarrassment on the UK which then in turn affects tourism?  What system or law is there in place to remove him from office? 

Like I said, it's an imperfect system. One of the imperfections is that you are beholden to luck in some ways as to the nature of who gets the number 1 spot. I mean, if Harry had been first born he may have been next. Fortunately it will be William and I suspect his sons will be raised to be decent human beings as well.

 

But again, look at the alternative. Biden was elected and look at the embarrassment he has become. Just because they are voted in and can be removed, doesn't mean you get decent people. Look at Blair and his war crimes. Using another system he could well end up as our Head of State. Canada would probably have Trudeau and his WEF tripe. 

[transam]

9 minutes ago, James105 said:

And if Charles turns out to be equivalent or worse than any of those you mentioned and brings embarrassment on the UK which then in turn affects tourism?  What system or law is there in place to remove him from office? 

Clutching at straws, are we. ????

 

King Charles lll, is a continuation of our history, if you don't like it.....TOUGH........????

[Bluespunk]

19 minutes ago, herfiehandbag said:

Firstly blaming the British establishment for that failure would be better received in New York (and in the Guardian for that matter) than would admitting that there wasn't really any evidence.

Nonsense.

 

20 minutes ago, herfiehandbag said:

Secondly, given Epstein's somewhat suspicious demise whilst in custody, is anyone surprised that there was a reluctance to deliver Prince Andrew to the New York judicial process?

Only if you indulge in conspiracy theories.

 

20 minutes ago, herfiehandbag said:

Incidentally I note that he was subsequently sacked as a prosecutor...

Irrelevant. 

[SunnyinBangrak]

24 minutes ago, herfiehandbag said:

I should imagine that prosecutor is very dismayed that his attempt to drag Prince Andrew in front of him in. New York court did not come off. Prosecuting high profile cases in the American judicial system is often the gateway to judicial eminence or a political career.

 

If this were true, would you not expect that more of the ultra VIP men using Epstein's young captives get arrested and have their day in court too? It's not as if their identity is a mystery. I still never heard an explanation for the only people guilty in Epstein's sordid sex trafficking ring are 2 Brits, Ms Maxell and Prince Andrew. Most peculiar.

[BritManToo]

9 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

If this were true, would you not expect that more of the ultra VIP men using Epstein's young captives get arrested and have their day in court too? It's not as if their identity is a mystery. I still never heard an explanation for the only people guilty in Epstein's sordid sex trafficking ring are 2 Brits, Ms Maxell and Prince Andrew. Most peculiar.

Can't have American royalty (Bill) 'disgraced'.

Anyone remember Chappaquiddick (Kennedy's)?

 

It's interesting that in the UK it's always the patriarchal right wingers accused. 

And in the USA it's always the woke, 'new world order' leaders being accused.

[JonnyF]

10 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

Only if you indulge in conspiracy theories.

It's not a conspiracy theory. He died in custody. That is an indisptable fact.

 

Even if you believe he comitted suicide that is a huge red flag against the New York authorities. Why would we have confidence to send a Prince over to a system that has proved itself utterly incompetent in keeping alive high profile defendants awaiting trial in the very same case?

[Bkk Brian]

While the average annual cost for UK taxpayers in royal upkeep comes to around £500m a year, Brand Finance estimates the monarchy’s brand contributes £2.5bn to the British economy in the same timeframe.

 

Not only a great institution but also a money making one.