Jump to content



Prince Andrew 'spent weeks' at Epstein home - witness


CharlieH

Recommended Posts

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:


Poor old Andrew, I wonder did he know his mum was in her last days when he went begging her for her money to shutdown accusations against him before he himself had to go under oath?

 

Yes I'm pretty sure he would have been aware of his Mother's deteriorating health. Also aware that a long stressful court case could add to her health problems. If he didn't know, he would have been advised of such.

 

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

 

Since you introduce yourself into the discussion, I trust that’s not something you’d stoop to.

 

I meant if I was Andrew I might have been tempted. I thought that was obvious. I don't need to take anyone's money. 

 

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

 

Despite our disagreements I like to think better of you than that.

 

That's sweet.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, stoner said:

 

as pointed out by another poster here. what does it matter where the money came from ? you keep banging on and on about it. 

 

how do you know he went to her begging ? maybe she approached him ? do you have proof of your wild accusations ? 

We’ll to fair,  begging mummy for money is the least of the accusations against the disgraced Prince Andrew.

  • Confused 2
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

We’ll to fair,  begging mummy for money is the least of the accusations against the disgraced Prince Andrew.

 

and again. predictable. assemble. 

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

We’ll to fair,  begging mummy for money is the least of the accusations against the disgraced Prince Andrew.

 

And just as credible as the other accusations. 

 

With the same amount of evidence to back it up. None. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

Well if she was 17 and he paid her for sex then it's illegal so it matters in a legal sense.

 

From a moral standpoint, she was clearly acting of her own free will, nobody was forcing her to do anything. She simply revised history at a later date to portray herself as a victim and get a big payout. A decent hustle which paid off nicely. Only a fool would believe she was forced into anything. Even the people arguing her case on this thread don't really believe that -  it's just a stick to beat the Royals with.  

 

Well I mean Elvis would never do something like that right.. oh wait Pricilla was 14

The hypocrisy is astounding

  • Confused 2
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

She also recruited other girls for sex.

 

A real gem, that Virginia. 

and it only happened once, right? tricked on that sole occasion when she was still a virgin - sad, sad, sad  and then they forced the money onto her

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, BobBKK said:

 

But seriously? I think he was utterly stupid, and I think he's an arrogant $%#@!  But there is something utterly tasteless in girls who have willingly sold sex, got paid, signed CAs - then bitterly complaining and getting paid AGAIN and still whining and selling their story. 17 might technically be a minor in some countries, but she knew exactly what she was doing, and the current woke culture that allows her to gain from it.

 

 

The whole point of the concept of a minor in law is that they don't know what they are doing. Stop victim blaming.

 

"Interesting" that you conflate defending rape victims with being woke.

  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ozimoron said:

 

The whole point of the concept of a minor in law is that they don't know what they are doing. Stop victim blaming.

 

"Interesting" that you conflate defending rape victims with being woke.

 

Is it a crime in every country?  You are saying she was raped and then took the money.  And a nice smiley photo?  You are confusing legal technicality with ethics. I already stated Andrew was and IS stupid but she took his money - right? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since he apparently did nothing wrong according to the consensus here why all the denials?

 

Should have just admitted everything since it is all consensual and nobodys business.  Fergie seems to think he is a nice enough guy that dont they still live in the same place 25 years after divorce? Having good relationship with exes is a sign of maturity.

Edited by Captain Monday
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Captain Monday said:

Since he apparently did nothing wrong according to the consensus here why all the denials?

 

Should have just admitted everything since it is all consensual and nobodies business.  Fergie seems to think he is a noce enough guy that dont they still live in the same place 25 years after divorce? Having good relationship with exes is a sign of maturity.

Or a sign of she is broke and needs to sponge off the his princely allowance

  • Sad 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Her word was given under oath.

 

Nobody ever lies do they. Sometimes people lie under oath, hence the reason people get pardoned and released from prison for crimes they did not commit.

 

Here is a recent cracker from the UK.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/jul/22/how-nick-the-serial-child-abuse-accuser-became-the-accused

 

Is Andrew guilty of crimes ? No idea.

 

But anyone hanging their hat on sworn testimony, or testimony given under oath of someones guilt, is lacking in the grey matter department.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, JonnyF said:

 

And just as credible as the other accusations. 

 

With the same amount of evidence to back it up. None. 

Again, sworn testimony before a court Jonny.

 

Don’t ever do such a thing unless you are telling the truth.

 

If the testimony was a lie, why doesn’t the disgraced Prince Andrew file a complaint of Perjury…. And libel?!

Edited by Chomper Higgot
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BobBKK said:

 

Is it a crime in every country?  You are saying she was raped and then took the money.  And a nice smiley photo?  You are confusing legal technicality with ethics. I already stated Andrew was and IS stupid but she took his money - right? 

 

I'm saying she had no idea because she was minor and not capable of making a judgement call in this matter because of her age..

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Cyclist said:

 

Nobody ever lies do they. Sometimes people lie under oath, hence the reason people get pardoned and released from prison for crimes they did not commit.

 

Here is a recent cracker from the UK.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/jul/22/how-nick-the-serial-child-abuse-accuser-became-the-accused

 

Is Andrew guilty of crimes ? No idea.

 

But anyone hanging their hat on sworn testimony, or testimony given under oath of someones guilt, is lacking in the grey matter department.

Again, Perjury is a serious crime.

 

Why doesn’t the disgraced Prince Andrew file a police complaint?!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Captain Monday said:

Since he apparently did nothing wrong according to the consensus here why all the denials?

 

Should have just admitted everything since it is all consensual and nobodys business.  Fergie seems to think he is a nice enough guy that dont they still live in the same place 25 years after divorce? Having good relationship with exes is a sign of maturity.

 

Acquiesce, not consent.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.