12 hours ago, ZicoKelly said:

That was pretty damning

He's clearly been bullshitting his way through all this

Didn't watch it, why?

2 hours ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

Didn't watch it, why?

where to start

Epstein and his pimp, Ghislaine Maxwell, are pretty fucking vile people in what they did and how they went about it

Prince Andrew knew full well what they were up to and took part in it

his account of things didn't stack up as to what we know did happen, and to what he's been accused of taking part in

his interview was a car crash where he couldn't bring himself to even comdemn his mate who was a convicted peadophile / sex offender

there's two sides to every story

after watching the interview and Panorama, I'm inclined not to believe Prince Andrew's, and there's not been one thing he's said or done where I've thought "ok, benefit of the doubt"

let him go and face questioning in America

we can swap him for that diplomat's wife who did a hit and run

He's said he's willing to go and give evidence hasn't he.

Whether he or she is lying, hopefully giving evidence would help.

Problem for me is lack of evidence and the time taken to bring this stuff forward. Don't like the TV stations operating in this way; plenty, like you have made their minds up already- which is concerning if there was ever to be a court case against him.

Would he legally have to go if asked?

1 minute ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

He's said he's willing to go and give evidence hasn't he.

Whether he or she is lying, hopefully giving evidence would help.

Problem for me is lack of evidence and the time taken to bring this stuff forward. Don't like the TV stations operating in this way; plenty, like you have made their minds up already- which is concerning if there was ever to be a court case against him.

I'd not got an opinon either way until I saw his interview - the program last night was a retort to that, and there was plenty evidence in there that contradicted some of stuff that Andrew said, which is why I said it was damning and makes him look like he's bullshiting

given the complete 180 he appears to have taken since his inteview, and I'm sure the palace is now controlling his output, I think it's fair to say he has been seen to put his foot in it

there's a reason Esptein topped himself, and theres a reason Andrew went and stayed with him for 5 days in NYC after he'd got out of jail for being convicted of sex offences 

he claimed he went to tell Esptein their friendship was over, but I don't think he was being an honourable friend and letting him down gently, not other 5 days and being filmed and pictured quite comfortable in their company

as said, this conclusion has been reached based on Andrew's version of events, and subquent claims, and proof, to the contrary

he may not even face criminal charges in the end, but if he went into questioning claiming not to know what Epstein and co were up to in the same way he carried out that interview, the FBI / US courts would eat him alive

3 minutes ago, Rudy’s Message said:

Would he legally have to go if asked?

I don't think so

if he stepped foot in America again they could try and surpeona him, but even then, as a royal, it won't be straightforward

even more so if he doesn't go there

it's up to him, if he's nothing to hide and completely innocent, he should get over their and prove it

if I was him, I'd just say "17 is legal in the UK" and blame everything else on Epstein and Maxwell

1 hour ago, ZicoKelly said:

I don't think so

if he stepped foot in America again they could try and surpeona him, but even then, as a royal, it won't be straightforward

even more so if he doesn't go there

it's up to him, if he's nothing to hide and completely innocent, he should get over their and prove it

if I was him, I'd just say "17 is legal in the UK" and blame everything else on Epstein and Maxwell

I just looked on google for the age of sexual consent.

 

Quote

The federal law establishes the age of 12 as the minimum age of consent, while the age at which there are no restrictions for consensual sexual activities is 18 (sex with someone 12-18 is not illegal per se, but can still be open to prosecution under certain circumstances).

 

1 hour ago, ZicoKelly said:

I'd not got an opinon either way until I saw his interview - the program last night was a retort to that, and there was plenty evidence in there that contradicted some of stuff that Andrew said, which is why I said it was damning and makes him look like he's bullshiting

 

Last night's program was recorded before Prince Andrew's. So not a retort to his interview.

Not dismissing the rest of it as I didn't watch it. Just not convinced either way, and I'm unimpressed with the BBC and what seems a bit of a sensationalist approach.

2 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

Last night's program was recorded before Prince Andrew's. So not a retort to his interview.

Not dismissing the rest of it as I didn't watch it. Just not convinced either way, and I'm unimpressed with the BBC and what seems a bit of a sensationalist approach.

I'd say

watch them both and see what you think after, or not

but I reckon that much of what was presented on Panorama - interviews, testimony and other evidence - would be used by a prosecution looking to nail him for actively engaging with girls trafficked for sexual purposes

at the very least it makes his interview and what he said seem absurd, which in turn makes him look like he's something to hide

 

12 minutes ago, MickyD said:

I just looked on google for the age of sexual consent.

 

 

and?

ps

clear your cache

1 hour ago, ZicoKelly said:

I'd say

watch them both and see what you think after, or not

but I reckon that much of what was presented on Panorama - interviews, testimony and other evidence - would be used by a prosecution looking to nail him for actively engaging with girls trafficked for sexual purposes

at the very least it makes his interview and what he said seem absurd, which in turn makes him look like he's something to hide

 

Not disputing any of the comments and "evidence" presented by the two interviews. 

Unfortunately, it's already been touched upon elsewhere on a news program, that it may now be difficult for a fair trial. If he does have something to hide, and has been up to no good, defense legal teams will have a field day before it even comes to trial. If it does.

Apart from a few clips on the news, I've not seen anything. Just hope they don't come knocking for me as a juror.

2 hours ago, MickyD said:

I just looked on google for the age of sexual consent.

 

 

I'd expect a knock anytime MickyD 😂 

I'm going to add to the search, "Just to see if Prince Andrew is a nonce." That'll sort it.

😂 

Since we've had the Leaving Neverlands and Surviving R Kelly, what are we calling the inevitable Netflix/HBO special for our Andy?

 

The non-sweaty nonce chronicles?

 

 

1 minute ago, deane koontz said:

Since we've had the Leaving Neverlands and Surviving R Kelly, what are we calling the inevitable Netflix/HBO special for our Andy?

 

The non-sweaty nonce chronicles?

 

 

Grand old Duke of poke.

The Princess and the Pea...do

1 minute ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

Grand old Duke of poke.

 

That has a good ring to it.

 

^ Which he also probably said 

 

5 hours ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

He's said he's willing to go and give evidence hasn't he.

Whether he or she is lying, hopefully giving evidence would help.

Problem for me is lack of evidence and the time taken to bring this stuff forward. Don't like the TV stations operating in this way; plenty, like you have made their minds up already- which is concerning if there was ever to be a court case against him.

The difference between criminal and civil cases arises again.

He has agreed to give evidence for a criminal prosecution, but the chances of that are not great.

Miss Maxwell may come out badly, and she was her father favourite (Captain Bob - he even named his yacht after her).

1 minute ago, MalcolmW said:

The difference between criminal and civil cases arises again.

He has agreed to give evidence for a criminal prosecution, but the chances of that are not great.

Miss Maxwell may come out badly, and she was her father favourite (Captain Bob - he even named his yacht after her).

I agree Malc; but having everything aired in public doesn't help if you're looking at a criminal case.

A danger of being guilty until proved innocent.

oh well Andrew is now really in the shit , Trump say's he doesn't know him 🤣🤣

4 hours ago, deane koontz said:

Since we've had the Leaving Neverlands and Surviving R Kelly, what are we calling the inevitable Netflix/HBO special for our Andy?

 

The non-sweaty nonce chronicles?

 

 

Honi soit qui mal y nonce

1 hour ago, SatanGreavsie said:

Honi soit qui mal y nonce

Bravo, sir.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/courts/prince-andrew-wont-voluntarily-cooperate-in-epstein-inquiry-says-us-prosecutor/ar-BB10XGjk?MSCC=1583849741&ocid=spartandhp

Prince Andrew has “completely shut the door” on cooperating with investigators in the Jeffrey Epstein case, US lawyer Geoffrey Berman said.

The prince previously commented in November that he was “willing to help any appropriate law enforcement agency with their investigations if required”.

Mr Berman, who is leading the inquiry into sex trafficking allegations against the late Mr Epstein and his alleged co-conspirators, spoke to the press on Monday countering the prince’s November claim.
 
The prosecutor said: “Contrary to Prince Andrew’s very public offer to cooperate with our investigation into Epstein’s co-conspirators, an offer that was conveyed via press release, Prince Andrew has now completely shut the door on voluntary cooperation and our office is considering its options.”

Two words: Anne Sacoolas.