RainbowTown
Well-Known Member
No, this is story first and foremost about justice for the victims of sexual trafficking and sexual abuse, and the bringing to account those who are and maybe responsible for it, regardless of 'celebrity' and status.
Prince Andrew, Duke of York, named in underage 'sex slave' lawsuit
- Thread starter editor
- Start date
No, this is story first and foremost about justice for the victims of sexual trafficking and sexual abuse, and the bringing to account those who are and maybe responsible for it, regardless of 'celebrity' and status.
Raheem
Well-Known Member
It's about the partial erosion of the idea that some people are above the law.
Only partial, mind. Most people would have had their laptop seized and be halfway through a prison sentence by now.
It's also enlightening that British royalty represents the low-hanging fruit compared to American business persons and so on.
Only partial, mind. Most people would have had their laptop seized and be halfway through a prison sentence by now.
It's also enlightening that British royalty represents the low-hanging fruit compared to American business persons and so on.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
Most crimes affect a comparatively small number of people. But I doubt you'd say the Moors murders or the activities of Wayne couzens were inconsequential on the issue of numbers involved. Having a member of the Windsor cabal tried by a court albeit in America is unusual if not unprecedented. As mentioned above this involves large numbers of people - if you've followed the Epstein revelations there were many, many girls and women abused
Well that's nice for you. I wonder if Virginia Roberts sees it as 'a celebrity story first and foremost, not a question of paramount justice'
seeformiles
Lost in the wood
I felt moved to comment/troll on an article on the DM site that he’s single handedly advanced the abolition of the monarchy by a decade or two. I was expecting to be flamed for it but, bugger me, it became the second most top-rated comment. The times they may be a-changing?
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
They won't change just by themselves, the monarchy need to be shoved off their pedestal
Kaka Tim
Half Arsed and Slapdash till I Die
Pretty sure that polling shows that people under 40 in particular are really not that arsed about the monarchy. They aren't all rabid republicans - but they dont have the automatic deference and acceptance of it that older generations do. Lizzy clocking out, the unloved charles taking over and the duke of nonce stuff means a serious weakening of the institution.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
I think the average age in the UK is 41. So I don't know how much mileage young people not being much arsed about the royal family matters. It's people young, middle-aged and yeh auld pushing together who'll get rid of the monarchy. I expect there are quite a few royalists who are reconsidering their position. Young people not being arsed about the monarchy means they don't see it as an issue - not that they want rid. I don't think the monarchy will necessarily be greatly weakened by this, it depends a) on what the queen and Charles knew when, and b) how they respond to Andrew being found guilty.
danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
weltweit
Well-Known Member
Prince Andrew: Emily Maitlis says duke's interview answers are critical to sex assault case
The BBC Newsnight presenter says details of the 2019 interview are being pored over by both sides.
www.bbc.co.uk
17 yr old co-conspirator?
Athos
Well-Known Member
Not sure of the timelines; how old she was at the time he'll allege she conspired with Epstein to recruit Carolyn. Wonder if Andrew will go down the same route, if it come to it?
Yes-perhaps he might attempt to hitch his wagon to Dershowitz somewhere down the line
ouirdeaux
Caring, Understanding, Non-judgemental Type
I don't think this is the nail in the coffin for the monarchy, much as I'd like to think it will be. Too many content with the status quo, for no better reason than that it's what they know. Even the young, who you'd hope weren't thoroughly ruined. But enough are.
Calamity1971
If Mr Peanut says It's okay, then it is.
CWS on form as per.
Check out Brenda.
Check out Brenda.
Athos
Well-Known Member
Bloody he'll...
www.google.com
Ghislaine Maxwell’s lawyers call for a retrial following juror’s interview
Maxwell’s legal team says they believe a new trial is warranted following revelations about juror
Bahnhof Strasse
Met up with Hannah Courtoy a week next Tuesday
Bloody he'll...
Ghislaine Maxwell’s lawyers call for a retrial following juror’s interview
Maxwell’s legal team says they believe a new trial is warranted following revelations about juror
Seems that is very common in the US and almost never succeeds. The whole point of a jury of your peers is that they bring a range of life experiences with them. Also a reason why jurors in the U.K. are prohibited from talking about shit like this.
keybored
Well done. You remember cat good.
Also I know some people will say Blimey, it seems an awful drag flying all the way to America to tell a chap one can't be his chum anymore, what?. But of course, transatlantic telephone calls were so super expensive in those days and mummy had no spare telegrams I could cadge that week. So yah, bit of a pickle.
RileyOBlimey
Well-Known Member
A bit like the old black panther that managed to be included in the OJ jury.
Athos
Well-Known Member
I think the issue is likely to be whether or not he told the truth on the screening questionnaire. I think that'd be more of a sticking point than the fact that he was abused. The US jury system, including how they're picked is bonkers. But I guess there's pros and cons of them being transparent afterwards.
two sheds
Least noticed poster 2007
He did say he wasn't asked before he was chosen and would have said if he had been asked, but yes and should be easy to check.
Athos
Well-Known Member
The prospective jurors were given a questionnaire upon which even the prosecution seems to acknowledge that was asked. He says he doesn't recall that question, but that he flew through the form.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
He would walk 500 miles and he would walk 500 more to chat to a chance acquaintance let alone tell a friend he was dropping him. But you can't walk over the Atlantic so he had to fly
Bahnhof Strasse
Met up with Hannah Courtoy a week next Tuesday
From what I read the question was whether friends or family members had been abused, but that could of course be wrong.
Athos
Well-Known Member
The Graun says:
'One inquiry on the questionnaire stated: “Have you or a friend or family member ever been the victim of sexual harassment, sexual abuse, or sexual assault?”'
I don't know how accurate that it, but it seems inherently unlikely they'd ask about family but not the prospective jurors themselves.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
Might have misread if as said he flew through the form
Athos
Well-Known Member
Yeah, that's looking most likely. But, if it had been accepted that a positive answer was a good basis to exclude a potential juror and this one answered falsely in the negative (even if innocently), or if the defence can say they'd have used one of their peremptory challenges to exclude this juror, that might be enough for a mistrial, especially given his comments about how he introduced stuff that wasn't evidence to his fellow jurors.
Last edited:
Similar threads
