Rockers rule 673 #877 Posted January 17, 2022 6 hours ago, PRESLEY said: In Victorian times, one of Victorias sons was a prime suspect in the Jack the Ripper case, clues were, he was studying to be a Surgeon and was a frequent visitor in the red light area and numerous other clues. But yes! How unusual, all covered up and Brushed under the big Royal Axminister. The Ripper book 'the final solution' by Stephen Knight covers the whole Walter Sickert / Albert Victor, royal family connection and is as conspiracy's go one of the better 'who was Jack the Ripper books. (£2.95 on't ebay) Keep safe out there . Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
crookesey 635 #878 Posted January 18, 2022 This family was so inbred that in many cases illnesses/conditions that our ancestors took in our stride, could be a death sentence to the royals. This is why they now look out of their immediate blood line for breeding purposes. They used to have such large families because many of them would succumb to conditions that just kept the likes of our ancestors off work for a couple of days or so. The more that in breeding took place the more was the chance of mental illnesses along with everything else. The problem that they now have as I see it is that due to modern technology they are easily seen being housed, transported, clothed and fed as if they deserved these luxuries, whilst doing bog all to prove it. Well that’s my little rant over, have a nice day. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
poppet2 13 #879 Posted January 18, 2022 17 hours ago, Rockers rule said: The Ripper book 'the final solution' by Stephen Knight covers the whole Walter Sickert / Albert Victor, royal family connection and is as conspiracy's go one of the better 'who was Jack the Ripper books. (£2.95 on't ebay) Keep safe out there . Why don't they just exhume the victims bodies and do a retrospective DNA on them and compare it to the suspects? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Rockers rule 673 #880 Posted January 18, 2022 2 minutes ago, poppet2 said: Why don't they just exhume the victims bodies and do a retrospective DNA on them and compare it to the suspects? Hello Poppet. The book was published in 1976. Totally agree DNA technology could prove a Royal connection to the Ripper murders. The first hint of Lizard DNA and we'd also know David Icke wasn't a raving nutter 🤣. Keep safe . Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
blackydog 40 #881 Posted January 20, 2022 On 14/01/2022 at 15:11, Anna B said: These are the sort of things that need looking at. There's going to be a lot of legal shenanigans going on trying to wriggle out of liability etc. That's why it needs to be as transparent as possible. Transparency and royalty don't go together. The queen has exemptions to the rules that we have to adhere to. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
crookesey 635 #882 Posted January 20, 2022 On 18/01/2022 at 13:59, poppet2 said: Why don't they just exhume the victims bodies and do a retrospective DNA on them and compare it to the suspects? I’m just imagining the Queen looking at photos of her great uncle Jack. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
PRESLEY 1,229 #883 Posted January 20, 2022 On 18/01/2022 at 13:59, poppet2 said: Why don't they just exhume the victims bodies and do a retrospective DNA on them and compare it to the suspects? Are you joking! Any finds being put infront of the royals would be hushed up and swept under the massive already lumpy axminster. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Chekhov 488 #884 Posted January 20, 2022 I have put this post in here though, TBH, I think Andrew's present "difficulties" should probably have their own thread.... I have no love for Prince Andrew, but implying he is a paedophile for (possibly) having sexual relations with a 17 year old when he was a reasonably good looking 40 year old prince - who many young women would have thrown themselves at - is taking it a bit far. In fact it annoys me because using the word in this context debases the word paedophile, people I obviously despise. To me, and most people I speak to, a paedo is someone much older having sex with a child. One's defintion of a child is a bit subjective but, to me, it does not include a 17 year old. Further, the age of the man matters, a 60 year old man sleeping with a 15 year old girl is creepy, but a 20 year old ? Not so much, and another 15 year old, not at all really. Interesting sidelight, when I was about 13 I had a crush on my teacher. If I'd have got any where with her I can assure you it would not have had a negative effect on my life, though, being a bit sexist, I would not approve of a male teacher doing anything with a 13 year old girl. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
steve68 66 #885 Posted January 20, 2022 22 minutes ago, Chekhov said: 60 year old man sleeping with a 15 year old girl is creepy No its a crime underage rape carries a maximum of life imprisonment Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
harvey19 541 #886 Posted January 20, 2022 39 minutes ago, Chekhov said: I have put this post in here though, TBH, I think Andrew's present "difficulties" should probably have their own thread.... I have no love for Prince Andrew, but implying he is a paedophile for (possibly) having sexual relations with a 17 year old when he was a reasonably good looking 40 year old prince - who many young women would have thrown themselves at - is taking it a bit far. In fact it annoys me because using the word in this context debases the word paedophile, people I obviously despise. To me, and most people I speak to, a paedo is someone much older having sex with a child. One's defintion of a child is a bit subjective but, to me, it does not include a 17 year old. Further, the age of the man matters, a 60 year old man sleeping with a 15 year old girl is creepy, but a 20 year old ? Not so much, and another 15 year old, not at all really. Interesting sidelight, when I was about 13 I had a crush on my teacher. If I'd have got any where with her I can assure you it would not have had a negative effect on my life, though, being a bit sexist, I would not approve of a male teacher doing anything with a 13 year old girl. I understand a paedophile is someone who has sex with a pre pubescent child. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Chekhov 488 #887 Posted January 20, 2022 Just now, harvey19 said: I understand a paedophile is someone who has sex with a pre pubescent child. Well some are implying Prince Andrew is one ! Did Epstein have sex with a pre pubescent child ( I don't actually know) ? The news regularly refer to him as a paedophile. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
cgksheff 44 #888 Posted January 20, 2022 (edited) 5 minutes ago, Chekhov said: Well some are implying Prince Andrew is one ! Did Epstein have sex with a pre pubescent child ( I don't actually know) ? The news regularly refer to him as a paedophile. There are many examples of previously precise words now being being used, colloquially, with much wider understandings. Not something to get annoyed about. Edited January 20, 2022 by cgksheff Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
