ECCOnoob 984 #817 Posted January 12, 2022 9 minutes ago, hackey lad said: A " young girl " who accepted a settlement of 500,000 dollars from a Billionaire . Wonder why ? We will never know considering one of the main protagonists is dead. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
hackey lad 3,824 #818 Posted January 12, 2022 2 minutes ago, ECCOnoob said: We will never know considering one of the main protagonists is dead. Why such a small settlement ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
ECCOnoob 984 #819 Posted January 12, 2022 (edited) 5 minutes ago, hackey lad said: Why such a small settlement ? Well I can only speak from my day job experience..... but generally when I get the inkling a claimant is only in it for easy money you know how many carrots to dangle before they snatch your hands off. In other words when some chancer comes along it's cheaper to pay them off than spending money fighting it. Edited January 12, 2022 by ECCOnoob Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
PRESLEY 1,201 #820 Posted January 13, 2022 1 hour ago, cuttsie said: Was he married to that ginger Royal at the time . Perhaps the photo where he has his hand around that lass is a fake . And maybe it was just a look a like of Andrew, come on now! If Andrew would have just said yes I did go to a club with her and yes that is me putting my arm around her as we were having a photo taken doesn't mean he slept with her, thats what a lot of people do, I have done this many times at weddings and at numerous social events with freinds, to get everybody in on the pic being taken' people huddle together by putting arms around shoulders or backs, this doesn't mean because on the photo I have had my arm around a mate or his wife I have slept with her or him even, but for Andrew to say I can't recall the girl in the photo and can't recall going to a club with her is complete garbage, the lie then leaves him wide open . Why lie if you have nothing to hide. I really think this idiot has got in with the wrong people and got carried a long on the wave and got into a hole he is finding hard to get out of, for me now it's a case of is is he a Perv or just naive. The same as when he was knockin the Porn Star off, Koo Stark, again was he seduced or just a seedy perv. it all begs a lot of self inflicted questions, Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Bargepole23 337 #821 Posted January 13, 2022 14 hours ago, West 77 said: You do know this is a civil case? You do know that nobody in the UK can be extradited to a foreign country to answer a civil case? Everyone including Prince Andrew is innocent until proven guilty. A civil case is not the same as a criminal case which is why the media and people can get away with making all sorts of comments and assumptions to discredit an individual. I do. I said he has a case to answer. You then decided to explain what I already fully understood. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Bargepole23 337 #822 Posted January 13, 2022 9 hours ago, ECCOnoob said: ....... a "young girl" who was well over the legal age of consent in most countries around the world at the time the photograph of taken. A photograph which hardly displays a image of someone being there by way of fear, enforcement, entrapment or reluctance. A young girl who was previously caught out giving dubious evidence on other similar cases. A young girl who is clearly chasing the money more than prepared to sign big fat non disclosure settlement agreements rather than getting to the truth. A young girl who is a master in manipulating the media for her next compensatory payout from easy high profile targets. A young girl who has not provided a single shred of any credible evidence to these allegations. This is a civil compensatory claim. Let's get that simple fact out there. Let's all stop with this ridiculous notion that there is some book to be thrown or some jail cell just waiting or PC Plod around the corner ready to charge in to arrest him. She's after nothing more than a big fat cheque. You know nothing of the facts other than those available in the media, and have judged this young woman as a money grabber, Who knows what duress she was placed under to sign whatever she signed. Wouldn't be the first time that the innocent have been coerced into signing something accepting something they didn't do. 13 hours ago, Anna B said: Guilty or not, the damage has been done. Even if he manages to dodge a trial / hearing, a cloud will always hang over his head, not least because he failed to cooperate with the Americans, and that disasterous interview. I very much doubt he will ever be able to return to public duties. Will we notice the difference? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Baron99 771 #823 Posted January 13, 2022 Surely, a totally innocent individual would relish their day in court (with their legal representatives), to take down their accuser? However, someone who decides to pay off their accuser, runs the risk of being permanently tarnished & would continue to have the finger pointed at them & by the action of paying off the accuser, could hardly defend the allegation that they weren't guilty of a crime in the first place. Let's face it. Nobody is going to see Prince Andrew standing up in the dock in a US courtroom. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
ECCOnoob 984 #824 Posted January 13, 2022 (edited) 1 hour ago, Bargepole23 said: You know nothing of the facts other than those available in the media, and have judged this young woman as a money grabber, Who knows what duress she was placed under to sign whatever she signed. Wouldn't be the first time that the innocent have been coerced into signing something accepting something they didn't do. Will we notice the difference? and? everyone seems more than happy to make sweeping, judgemental, uncorroborated statements about the Prince based on no facts and media speculation - why shouldn't I be able to apply the same to this woman. I doubt very much that she was under any sort of duress to sign a settlement agreement. At the time she was in a court of law surrounded by her team of lawyers. She has been more than happy to become the professional victim, whoring herself around any media outlet that will pay her and bringing further actions against other high-profile targets. Hardly some frightened, timid, manipulated little girl acting under duress. Edited January 13, 2022 by ECCOnoob Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
harvey19 541 #825 Posted January 13, 2022 If someone has done something wrong they are punished by the law and receive a sentence. Why then is a civil case being brought ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
PRESLEY 1,201 #826 Posted January 13, 2022 Lets get this straight to all the deluded royalist on this forum, the royals over the years have been guilty of plenty of crimes, hushed up and swept under giant carpets in buck house ect, I would not like to be one of the cleaners trying to run an hoover over them. THEY ARE ABOVE THE LAW, thats why they don't get the same treatment as the rest of us. Like it or lump that is the TRUTH about this lot. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Cyclecar 24 #827 Posted January 13, 2022 This is a sordid, salacious debacle. HRHTDOY is not very bright (not the only one in "The Firm"...), and he has lived a life of magnificent privelege where his every wish has been granted, and none of his actions questioned. Accordingly, he has surrounded himself with yes men who only tell him what he wants to hear. Hence this mess. It will inevitably end in a settlement. In US civil cases, each side bear their own legal costs. HRH has run up a huge bill so far, and "The Firm" have left him in no doubt that it's his tab. HMTQ won't sell off a couple of Rembrandts to straighten him out. And he has run out of chums, as he is no longer a person of influence who can make introductions. His lead wig alone (and there's a full team plus reserves) charges £1k/hour. Go figure. For the plaintiff's part, she has also run un up a hefty legal tab. This will be paid from the proceeds of the action, should she win. As the bill ratchets up, her team may push her to settle if only to ensure they get paid. Nothing in litigation is certain, only dollars. But you have to admire the faithful British media, on air or in print. Every twist and turn is gleefully analysed. The picture of HRH, the Plaintiff and Ms M is reprinted ad nauseum, the BBC interview with our Emily is repeated as though on a loop tape. In a couple of months we will have document disclosure where more titillating details will emerge. Rumours of a threeway will persist. All good for circulation and viewing figures. Governorship of the Falklands beckons. That will have the penguins running. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
PRESLEY 1,201 #828 Posted January 13, 2022 8 minutes ago, Cyclecar said: This is a sordid, salacious debacle. HRHTDOY is not very bright (not the only one in "The Firm"...), and he has lived a life of magnificent privelege where his every wish has been granted, and none of his actions questioned. Accordingly, he has surrounded himself with yes men who only tell him what he wants to hear. Hence this mess. It will inevitably end in a settlement. In US civil cases, each side bear their own legal costs. HRH has run up a huge bill so far, and "The Firm" have left him in no doubt that it's his tab. HMTQ won't sell off a couple of Rembrandts to straighten him out. And he has run out of chums, as he is no longer a person of influence who can make introductions. His lead wig alone (and there's a full team plus reserves) charges £1k/hour. Go figure. For the plaintiff's part, she has also run un up a hefty legal tab. This will be paid from the proceeds of the action, should she win. As the bill ratchets up, her team may push her to settle if only to ensure they get paid. Nothing in litigation is certain, only dollars. But you have to admire the faithful British media, on air or in print. Every twist and turn is gleefully analysed. The picture of HRH, the Plaintiff and Ms M is reprinted ad nauseum, the BBC interview with our Emily is repeated as though on a loop tape. In a couple of months we will have document disclosure where more titillating details will emerge. Rumours of a threeway will persist. All good for circulation and viewing figures. Governorship of the Falklands beckons. That will have the penguins running. Great Post. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...