Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Prince Andrew, Duke of York, named in underage 'sex slave' lawsuit

While I’m not sure the competitive evil calculation is useful or even possible, I do feel the need to point out that you seem to have drawn an equivalence between Ghislane Maxwell’s crimes, and a hypothetical employee procuring women for her father.

Ghislane Maxwell wasn’t just a procurer. She groomed children into sexual exploitation and trafficking. Not women. Children of 14.
I was pointing out that her father was an evil, powerful, murderous old shit and that Epstein was an evil, powerful child abusing shit. She is an evil abusing factotum. I too am wary of "competitive evil calculation". However, I think it is absurd to say that "her crimes exceeded her dad", if only because she never had the power to commit the crimes of her dad.
 
I'm struggling with the prosecutions argument that this "was the worst crimes imaginable" anybody concur.

I'd have thought on the other side of the pond that 9/11 or the Holocaust would beat this to the title of "worst crime imaginable" - or have they got a very sheltered prosecution.

Nobody died here.
Whilst perhaps not on a holocaust level of war crime, she trafficked children, repeatedly. We don't know how many victims there are, nor the effects of trauma on them. For example, Virginia Guiffre has spoken about wanting to die, on the Epstein island she was trafficked to.

Because she is a woman who committed these crimes against children, and against the general societal philosophy of 'women don't do this type of thing', that's why it's in the 'worst crime imaginable' territory.
 
Because she is a woman who committed these crimes against children, and against the general societal philosophy of 'women don't do this type of thing', that's why it's in the 'worst crime imaginable' territory.

Yes, small children in the UK are murdered by their male "carers" to frequently for it normally to get much press coverage. If, however, as we've seen twice in the past few weeks those responsible are women it makes the news with great emphasis on their intrinsic depravity.

For example, these wicked crimes

 
Last edited:
Just spotted that as well as Dershowitz, the BBC presented comments on the trial from Kyle Rittenhouse's defence lawyer.

#impartial
 
Yes, I realise that.. I was asking whether it's the crossing the state lines that makes it specifically a federal offense.


ah

think that's what's confusing me (and probably a few other people in the UK) - while there are some differences in law round the four countries of the UK, the whole concept of state and federal law / offences is a bit :confused: from a UK perspective...
 
ah

think that's what's confusing me (and probably a few other people in the UK) - while there are some differences in law round the four countries of the UK, the whole concept of state and federal law / offences is a bit :confused: from a UK perspective...
Scotland is completely different. It is probably as different from English ( which also means Welsh) law than we both are from American law.

It has loads of the old cool offences like housebreaking and the ‘not proven’ verdict. Breach of the peace is a crime there too.
 
Just looked that up. Ace crime, I’d like that on my record.
I liked this bit from the wiki entry:

In discussions of law, mopery is used as a placeholder name to mean some crime whose nature is not important to the problem at hand. This is sometimes expanded to "mopery with intent to creep" or "mopery with intent to gawk".

I want ‘mopery with intent to gawk’ on my charge sheet.
 
Scotland is completely different. It is probably as different from English ( which also means Welsh) law than we both are from American law.

It has loads of the old cool offences like housebreaking and the ‘not proven’ verdict. Breach of the peace is a crime there too.

Scottish and English law is different. But committing a crime that straddles the border between the two countries doesn't elevate the crime in any way, unlike in the US
 
Scottish and English law is different. But committing a crime that straddles the border between the two countries doesn't elevate the crime in any way, unlike in the US
It doesn’t as the UK isn’t federal. Also in law UK borders ( parish and county which are both important for charging ) are 1km wide, in that any courts jurisdiction extends up to 500 meters into the next. This avoids the Dukes of Hazard county line stuff.
 
Scotland is completely different. It is probably as different from English ( which also means Welsh) law than we both are from American law.

It has loads of the old cool offences like housebreaking and the ‘not proven’ verdict. Breach of the peace is a crime there too.

yes - i know some of the offences are different, and that some things can be illegal in Scotland but not in England (or vice versa) but you either get done in an English or Scottish court depending on where you (allegedly) did whatever.

I used to be involved in doing criminal records checks for taxi drivers, and one came back as having been done for "lewd and libidinous practices and behaviour" in Scotland, and had to make some enquiries just what this meant (think it equated to indecent exposure in English law) before we said 'no'
 
That was the county line (probation condition).
If you commit a non federal offence ( including murder) in one US state and then go to another there almost always has to be an extradition process to bring you back for trial as if you had gone to another country.
 
yes - i know some of the offences are different, and that some things can be illegal in Scotland but not in England (or vice versa) but you either get done in an English or Scottish court depending on where you (allegedly) did whatever.

I used to be involved in doing criminal records checks for taxi drivers, and one came back as having been done for "lewd and libidinous practices and behaviour" in Scotland, and had to make some enquiries just what this meant (think it equated to indecent exposure in English law) before we said 'no'

They also have completely different rules of evidence, for example you need two witnesses for most things, so their old bill always have to act in pairs. Also they don’t have PACE so police powers, searches, detention and all the other stuff is / are completely different.
 
If you commit a non federal offence ( including murder) in one US state and then go to another there almost always has to be an extradition process to bring you back for trial as if you had gone to another country.
comes up a lot in episodes of Law & Order.
the suspect has popped 5 mins down the road, from New York to New Jersey and now might as well be on the other side of the planet. (may be exaggerated for dramatic effect)
 
I think we’re heading for a royal suicide very soon as Randy Andy literally threw himself under the bus with alibi the now convicted child groomer.
 
This is an odd way of championing the rights of Assange the Shit Smearer. , who was also credibly accused of rape. I'm sure the D of Y wishes that he'd committed his alleged offences in Sweden as the Swedish Statute of Limitations would mean that too much time had elapsed for charges to be brought.




If assange is being effectively tortured by the government it's the only effective thing they're doing
 
I'm struggling with the prosecutions argument that this "was the worst crimes imaginable" anybody concur.

I'd have thought on the other side of the pond that 9/11 or the Holocaust would beat this to the title of "worst crime imaginable" - or have they got a very sheltered prosecution.

Nobody died here.
Yeh I've noticed you struggling with quite a bit. For those of us not involved with jihadi terrorism or in positions of power in Nazi Germany, which is most of us, things like murder, rape, and child abuse are among the worst crimes people can commit.
 
Back
Top Bottom