Jump to content


The Royal Family Discussion Thread

Recommended Posts

2 Points

1) Andrew will have  Royal Protection Officer( s) .  They and the Police Logs at the time will be able to say where he was at the time of the alledged  trip to Woking Pizza Hut . The fact that he has not produced either is rather Damning

 

2) irrespective if Andrew is guilty or not ,he will not get a fair  trial in America . American Juries are notorious for finding in favour of Americans in any case against foreigners despite the evidence

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think that Andrew will risk the exposure of the case going ahead.
He will try and press for a financial settlement, but currently the plaintiff is being reported as wanting her day in court.
If she continues to turn down the offers, I think that she will win by default when Andrew fails to take part.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 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.

Really?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-59977517

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If there is no evidence for a criminal case what can a civil case be based on ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have a duty to protect folk like Andrew from anti royal  accusations, however could he please meet us half way and tell the truth? I never went with cradle snatching, very young girls need protection from the bad guys.

Edited by crookesey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, harvey19 said:

If there is no evidence for a criminal case what can a civil case be based on ?

There is evidence, but prosecutors usually make decisions on the probability of conviction based on guidelines and the standards of proof required.

Crimes must generally be proved "beyond a reasonable doubt", whereas civil cases are proved by lower standards of proof such as "the preponderance of the evidence" (which essentially means that it was more likely than not that something occurred in a certain way).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, crookesey said:

We have a duty to protect folk like Andrew from anti royal  accusations, however could he please meet us half way and tell the truth? I never went with cradle snatching, very young girls need protection from the bad guys.

He told the world in that famous interview that he had done nothing wrong.

Why don't you believe Him ?

 

1 hour ago, cgksheff said:

There is evidence, but prosecutors usually make decisions on the probability of conviction based on guidelines and the standards of proof required.

Crimes must generally be proved "beyond a reasonable doubt", whereas civil cases are proved by lower standards of proof such as "the preponderance of the evidence" (which essentially means that it was more likely than not that something occurred in a certain way).

What evidence is there ?

Plenty of accusations and speculation are what I hear but no factual evidence.

Edited by harvey19

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All those nice uniforms..........................could The Crucible use them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, blackydog said:

Really?

6 hours ago, blackydog said:

 

Yes really. I keep saying, it is a civil compensation claim i.e. a money claim.  Whatever her lawyers try to declare she thinks she's going to get resolved out of this case, the simple fact his money is the only outcome.

 

This is not a criminal case that's going to lead to prosecution or sentencing or jail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, harvey19 said:

He told the world in that famous interview that he had done nothing wrong.

Why don't you believe Him ?

 

What evidence is there ?

Plenty of accusations and speculation are what I hear but no factual evidence.

Sworn statements and witnesses are 'evidence'. 

It will be up to the court to decide whose claims are more believable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cyclecar said:

All those nice uniforms..........................could The Crucible use them?

Will he be leaving all the perks as well , castles , property , cars , and other privileges stolen from the people over a few hundred years by this family.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.