19 hours ago, Tug said:

Wonder if he will actually do time in prison…..likely not would be my guess.bet this is making a lot of the wealthy well connected folks nervous ehh….???

How can a person who has not been charged with anything do time in prison?

5 hours ago, stevenl said:

So if he sings in the UK, how do you think that will affect Trump?

Perhaps Andrew and Trump were at one of Epstein's parties, or on his island, at the same time, and Andrew witnessed things that Trump has denied.

Andrew then becomes a star witness.

30 minutes ago, Roadsternut said:

Virtually every online media source in the UK has now shut down all commenting on articles related to this court. Posters may find themselves in contempt of court if they speculate on the details of the case, or speculate on the character of the accused. Anyone here under the age of 75 who maintains UK residency in some way may find themselves required for jury service.

Explained

https://www.attorneygeneralni.gov.uk/files/attorneygeneralni/2024-01/Social%20media%20and%20contempt%20of%20court%20%28AGNI%29.pdf

The claim that “virtually every online media source in the UK has shut down all commenting” is simply not correct. There is no blanket legal requirement forcing UK media outlets to disable comments on articles about this case. Some publishers may choose to moderate or temporarily close comments on sensitive stories, but that is a discretionary editorial decision not a universal rule.

The guidance from the Attorney General for Northern Ireland about social media and contempt of court explains that people should avoid publishing material that could seriously prejudice an active criminal trial. It does not say that all discussion must cease, nor does it impose an automatic ban on online commentary.

It’s also worth noting that the individual in question Prince Andrew has been arrested and released under investigation, but has not been charged or put on trial at this stage. Contempt law in the UK is primarily concerned with protecting the fairness of active proceedings before a jury. It is not a blanket prohibition on discussion.

If the moderators believe there should be additional restrictions here, they are of course free to set out a clear policy and all of us responsible users can follow it. But suggesting that ordinary discussion automatically puts tens of thousands of people at risk of police action is not a realistic interpretation of the law. I supect you are a royalist in shock who is attempting to stifle the healthy debate.

UK courts and police can warn that publishing prejudicial details about an ongoing criminal trial may risk contempt of court once a prosecution is active — but at this stage:

Andrew is not yet charged.

There is no trial underway.

There is therefore no immediate legal ban on discussing the arrest or allegations, as long as discussions do not actively risk prejudicing a future fair trial once charges are made.

In other words: discussion about the facts of the situation and reporting what reputable news outlets have published is generally allowed. But when a case goes to trial, caution is needed to avoid prejudice — that’s when contempt law becomes directly relevant.

Here is the Sun with a new creepy video and the narrtive they are suggesting which I think is perjorative and irrelavnt is to paint the former Prioce as a paedophile. Now that is irresponsible - but then Murdoch was never a royalist and they are baying along with a large segment of the British population for royal blood. The hunter has become the hinted.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/royals/38282130/creepy-moment-andrew-plays-boob-ball-toddler-bizarre-snaps/

14 hours ago, Yagoda said:

Who is he gonna a sing against? Bill Clinton?

Possibly anyone and everyone, to save himself.

12 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Yeah the walls have been closing in for 10 years. Like melting glaciers.

He should have moved to Thailand while he still had the chance.

Like we all did.

10 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Yeah the walls have been closing in for 10 years. Like melting glaciers.

11 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Yeah the walls have been closing in for 10 years. Like melting glaciers.

I would say it is a fast rolling snowball that is catching up to the general public in awareness of the Epstein case with more than the majority disapprove on how Trump is trying to cover up Epstein's crimes and similar percentage believe that he was involved. The snowball will be an avalanche by mid-term which set up nicely for the hammer to fall on Donny.

2 hours ago, Roadsternut said:

Anyone here under the age of 75 who maintains UK residency in some way may find themselves required for jury service.

That is always a possibility for some, but rather unlikely with my criminal record, who says crime doesn't pay

58 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

I would say it is a fast rolling snowball that is catching up to the general public in awareness of the Epstein case with more than the majority disapprove on how Trump is trying to cover up Epstein's crimes and similar percentage believe that he was involved. The snowball will be an avalanche by mid-term which set up nicely for the hammer to fall on Donny.

Yep like all the others. This is the real one. They're going to get him now.

5 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I gave you a thumbs down for having demonstrated you really don’t grasp the fact that while the UK are delivering justice to the powerful and well connected, the U.S. are engaged in distraction while the powerful and well connected are free from justice.

That doesn't surprise me at all. I should I consider myself lucky that you are not authorised to hand out lines, issue detention , or administer some sort of digital corporal punishment , six strokes of the cane cane delivered from the choo choo , train train

you won't be living that one down so quickly

5 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I gave you a thumbs down for having demonstrated you really don’t grasp the fact that while the UK are delivering justice to the powerful and well connected, the U.S. are engaged in distraction while the powerful and well connected are free from justice.

The USA arrested and charged Epstein and Maxwell years ago

To me, the real 800 pound gorilla isn't the arrest and investigation about leaking internal trade policies to Epstein (as much of an eye popper that is). To me, the real wopper is still K Charles's stripping Andrew of all titles and the boot out of the royal household in its entirety. At the time he did that, the common wisdom among British journalists was that the king was doing so because of the salacious connection to Epstein. But my guess is that Charles knows much more about things still to come that we haven't heard yet - he was tipped off. In other words, this is just the beginning for Andrew. The real nasty stuff has yet to be published - and that's why such unprecedented moves were made against Andrew by his elder brother in such a surprising fashion - i.e. major damage control in advance. We shall see. (of course, this is another deliberate distraction for Trump).

2 hours ago, KhunHeineken said:

Perhaps Andrew and Trump were at one of Epstein's parties, or on his island, at the same time, and Andrew witnessed things that Trump has denied.

Andrew then becomes a star witness.

It's an interesting theory. Remember the US (DOJ?) is in control of what's being released from the Epstein files, which are heavily redacted about many people - yet Andrew pops up in them unredacted. Is the US throwing Andrew under bus as a major distraction? If so, I'd saying it's working as intended.

9 minutes ago, ronnie50 said:

It's an interesting theory. Remember the US (DOJ?) is in control of what's being released from the Epstein files, which are heavily redacted about many people - yet Andrew pops up in them unredacted. Is the US throwing Andrew under bus as a major distraction? If so, I'd saying it's working as intended.

Police / prosecutors one need one pedophile in a ring of pedophiles to cooperate with investigators in return for a lighter sentence and the whole ring of them are arrested and prosecuted. Not uncommon in ordinary criminal cases.

That's why I asked, "Will Andrew be "suicided?"

What does he know, and about who? Will he talk?

There's some very powerful and wealthy people with a lot to lose, possibly based on his police interview, and / or testimony in a witness box.

Could Trump go from the presidency to prison?

33 minutes ago, ronnie50 said:

To me, the real 800 pound gorilla isn't the arrest and investigation about leaking internal trade policies to Epstein (as much of an eye popper that is). To me, the real wopper is still K Charles's stripping Andrew of all titles and the boot out of the royal household in its entirety. At the time he did that, the common wisdom among British journalists was that the king was doing so because of the salacious connection to Epstein. But my guess is that Charles knows much more about things still to come that we haven't heard yet - he was tipped off. In other words, this is just the beginning for Andrew. The real nasty stuff has yet to be published - and that's why such unprecedented moves were made against Andrew by his elder brother in such a surprising fashion - i.e. major damage control in advance. We shall see. (of course, this is another deliberate distraction for Trump).

Charlie would have been well briefed by MI5 and MI6 on what was to come for Andrew.

Based on that briefing, he decided to cut all ties.

Just now, KhunHeineken said:

Charlie would have been well briefed by MI5 and MI6 on what was to come for Andrew.

Based on that briefing, he decided to cut all ties.

What a load of crap !! you have NO idea if he was briefed at all, it is just YOUR opinion and a bad one at that ! stupid post

4 minutes ago, MikeandDow said:

What a load of crap !! you have NO idea if he was briefed at all, it is just YOUR opinion and a bad one at that ! stupid post

So, Charlie woke up one morning and just thought he would give Andrew the boot. Really?

You are really that naive?

5 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

So, Charlie woke up one morning and just thought he would give Andrew the boot. Really?

You are really that naive?

I think you’re spot on.

1 hour ago, Bday Prang said:

That is always a possibility for some, but rather unlikely with my criminal record, who says crime doesn't pay

So you had a prison snetence of over 5 years pray do tell !

16 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

Charlie would have been well briefed by MI5 and MI6 on what was to come for Andrew.

Based on that briefing, he decided to cut all ties.

Seem to recall that Charlie had a private long serious talk with Andy about the subject , I expect that Andy told him everything

59 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

The USA arrested and charged Epstein and Maxwell years ago

Yeah why wasn't Randy Andy probed then. I wonder if the Biden administration coveted it up to protect the guys like Bill Clinton

2 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

Seem to recall that Charlie had a private long serious talk with Andy about the subject , I expect that Andy told him everything

Chuckles can send him to the tower and do a little head chopping

6 hours ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

As long as Trump is President and holds both houses of Congress, he remains effectively 'bombproof.' However, if the Republicans lose the Senate in the 2026 midterms, the landscape changes. While he would almost certainly be impeached by a Democrat-led House, an impeachment trial without a two-thirds majority in the Senate still lacks the 'legs' to actually remove him from office. The real danger isn't the impeachment itself; it's the evidence Andrew might provide that could fuel state-level criminal cases once Trump eventually leaves the White House

At 85 years, with many options to delay any legal proceedings. No matter how much i dislike it, nothing will happen to him .

3 hours ago, KhunHeineken said:

Perhaps Andrew and Trump were at one of Epstein's parties, or on his island, at the same time, and Andrew witnessed things that Trump has denied.

Andrew then becomes a star witness.

This investigation is not about what happened at Epstein island, it is about trade secrets he is suspected to have leaked

17 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

Charlie would have been well briefed by MI5 and MI6 on what was to come for Andrew.

Based on that briefing, he decided to cut all ties.

I think all of this is purely performative. Up until the file dump, they styled it out, paid £12 million, and ignored the clamour and that includes the government. After the dump, they’re doing the bare minimum to assuage public anger. They’re charging him with misconduct in public office which is very difficult to prove and they’re dumping the blame onto Mandelson. This buys them six months to probably find, in the end, insufficient evidence, and the reality is it was basically an unpaid role and he made serious errors of judgment.

And of course, the King knew - just last week Anne made it known that Andrew had suffered enough. So they are trying to firewall Andrew now from the core insititutioon, strip his titles, move him to Sandringham private estate, and stage a huge performative arrest and humiliation. If no further public evidence surfaces, they’ll likely just let this ride.

Charles may well abdicate on health grounds in a couple of years, taking some of the residual blame, and QEII is getting dumped on. The hope seems to be that, in the end, with the "clean" hands of William and Kate they get to do a reboot. Job done.

He ain't going to prison I would bet my wife on it. That's not for them. Probably all wargamed in some top secret Cabinet Office meeting after the file dump how do we handle this and get ahead of the game. Sir Keir will probably tell HM at his weeklies - don't worry your maj we have it covered.

The wild card is if anything else surfaces that breaks that spell and controlled narrative but at the moment that's my take.

ps with Edward 8th actaully consorting with the Nazis and encouraging the bombing of the UK and should have been hung for treason and paedo Mountbatten getting away with it this is child's play.

GOD SAVE THE QUEEN - THE FASCIST REGIME.

3 hours ago, Liverpool Lou said:

23 hours ago, Tug said:

Wonder if he will actually do time in prison…..likely not would be my guess.bet this is making a lot of the wealthy well connected folks nervous ehh….???

How can a person who has not been charged with anything do time in prison?

Obviously @Tug meant IF he is charged and IF he is convicted, which all MAY happen in the future mr Pedant.

15 hours ago, CallumWK said:

Obviously @Tug meant IF he is charged and IF he is convicted, which all MAY happen in the future mr Pedant.

I responded to what he said.

I wonder if he appreciates your being his spokesman as much as he should?

since Charles, Philip and their mother helped Andrew pay 12 million pounds for Virginia Giufre silence and they knew by doing so they indirectly agreed Andrew was guilty, thus they should be held accountable also, as Charles said, the law is the law and should take its course, they cover up and that is not acceptable

35 minutes ago, Mavideol said:

they knew by doing so they indirectly agreed Andrew was guilty

I think they made a mistake there.
But no, it was not an indirect admission of guilt.

3 hours ago, stevenl said:

I think they made a mistake there.
But no, it was not an indirect admission of guilt.

when somebody accuses you of doing something against their will, there are 2 options =1 if not guilty go to court and clear your name and 2= you pay up the accuser to withdraw their claim, by doing so it's kind of guilty admission, thus all the ones from Andrew side that were involved are to be considered accomplices since they didn't disclose the agreement nor it's content, that's a big mistake and soon it will come biting them on the rear, Mandelson should be arrested and questioned as well, after all that's him who suggested the mother to give the trade adviser job to Andrew, I do think Mandelson will "sing" out loud soon

6 minutes ago, Mavideol said:

when somebody accuses you of doing something against their will, there are 2 options =1 if not guilty go to court and clear your name and 2= you pay up the accuser to withdraw their claim, by doing so it's kind of guilty admission, thus all the ones from Andrew side that were involved are to be considered accomplices since they didn't disclose the agreement nor it's content, that's a big mistake and soon it will come biting them on the rear, Mandelson should be arrested and questioned as well, after all that's him who suggested the mother to give the trade adviser job to Andrew, I do think Mandelson will "sing" out loud soon

No, a settlement is not per definition an admission of guilt.