Randy Andy Again

TwelveAngryMen said:
You said when 18 so if it was when HRH was allegedly having sex with her she was a minor herself
No doubt you'll continue to castigate her morality whilst at the same giving the benefit of the doubt to HRH on all counts
Click to expand...
Can I point out that as of this afternoon he's no longer HRH. Stripped of all titles by his Mum.
 
Lost Seasider said:
If you read the article, the claims about the text messages and conversation relate to when VG was 17 and C was 13, March 2001 I think.

So a minor, but above a.o.c.




There's plenty on here who would be happy to lock PA up and throw away the keys, I'm interested in what the other side of the story is.
Click to expand...
Andrew Windsor not Prince Andrew
 
Wizaard said:
Can I point out that as of this afternoon he's no longer HRH. Stripped of all titles by his Mum.
Click to expand...
No smoke without fire. For such an arrogant entitled sod this must be the ultimate humiliation. He will not be making any more TV appearances and the press will make a game of trying to get sightings of him.
But he cannot be stripped of his title of Prince, as it is his birthright in the funny little Ruritanian world of monarchy.
 
Archibald Knox said:
No smoke without fire. For such an arrogant entitled sod this must be the ultimate humiliation. He will not be making any more TV appearances and the press will make a game of trying to get sightings of him.
But he cannot be stripped of his title of Prince, as it is his birthright in the funny little Ruritanian world of monarchy.
Click to expand...
Going to court as a private citizen as Andrew Windsor.
 
Wizaard said:
Going to court as a private citizen as Andrew Windsor.
Click to expand...
That’s as may be. But he still cannot be stripped of “Prince”. He may be advised not to use it but cannot be banned. It’s the loss of the grovelling “Your Royal Highness” everywhere he goes that will pique him.
They could not do that even to Diana after her divorce, as she had acquired her title of Princess by marriage. So they satisfied themselves by chopping off the “of Wales” bit and removing HRH.
 
Last edited:
I think HMQ has been very heavily leant on by Charles and William.
She would not have done this willingly without the thumbscrews being applied.

What it says is that the rest of the RF do not fancy Andrew’s chances particularly highly.
 
Mexboroseasider said:
You have to wonder what’s going to happen to the Royal Family once Brenda’s popped her clogs.
Click to expand...
Perhaps it's the future monarchs making sure the brand isn't tainted in such an obvious way?

It's a bit ironic that the two must active military members of the RF now have no role to play.

Still, it's probably the start of the reforms Charles has been airing for some time. A bit smaller and more focussed.
 
To be honest the Queen should have done this a while ago.

I don‘t think it’s an integrity based decision on her part.

I think she would have used all her powers to exonerate him from all of this and kept him in the fold without question if things hadn’t become beyond her control and powers.

That doesn’t reflect well on her judgement or moral code in my oponion. It’s actually another arrogant p*sstake !
 
I reckon they might be reconsidering the hard time they gave Haz and Megs for very little offence, in comparison. Charley Farley and Just William I mean.
 
There’s a couple of stories floating around that VG may call Meghan Markle to give evidence.

If it happens it’ll put the cat among the pigeons in all sorts of ways. 😂
 
I suppose if the accusers' legal team calls Megan Markle to give evidence against Andrew, then he can use the
defence that as a direct descendant of Dracula, he only takes advantage of young women that are virgins.
 
Danny Ocean said:
I suppose if the accusers' legal team calls Megan Markle to give evidence against Andrew, then he can use the
defence that as a direct descendant of Dracula, he only takes advantage of young women that are virgins.
Click to expand...
Wow DO are you implying that Megans been round the block a few times? 😉
 
Prince of p@SS all, except he’ll still live in a private luxurious home in Windsor great park, still have a security detail probably paid for, still have more money than you and I can ever dream of and won’t need to apply for a job at Aldi.
 
I have no idea which way this will go, but in total bad taste -

I will be sat in front of the TV watching it with popcorn 👍
 
Whether he settles or goes to court, Virginia would have more credibility if she said she would donate any settlement to charity. She’s already reported to be a multi millionaire. If she’s really only interested in her day in court, then she’ll reject any offer. Watch this space.
 
Matesrates said:
Whether he settles or goes to court, Virginia would have more credibility if she said she would donate any settlement to charity. She’s already reported to be a multi millionaire. If she’s really only interested in her day in court, then she’ll reject any offer. Watch this space.
Click to expand...
She’s already donated a substantial amount of the damages paid to her so far, through her own charity Victims Refuse Silence (who provide support to victims of sex trafficking and abuse). Her Lawyers have already confirmed that she will be doing the same with regard to the PA claim.
 
BFC_BFC_BFC said:
She’s already donated a substantial amount of the damages paid to her so far, through her own charity Victims Refuse Silence (who provide support to victims of sex trafficking and abuse). Her Lawyers have already confirmed that she will be doing the same with regard to the PA claim.
Click to expand...
Just checked up on Victims Refuse Silence EIN 47-2627774 registered in Fort Lauderdale Florida.

Under Finance and Accountability Score the reply is “This organisation cannot be evaluated because it files Form 990-N as allowed by the IRS for charities with less than 50k USD annual revenue”.

Is that the charity you mean?

If so just how much has she donated?
 
Lost Seasider said:
Why would you care?
Click to expand...
Well you thought is was a point well made by Mates and I thought you might be reassured by BFC's reply that charitable donations are intended from any settlement / award
Equally if she wanted to keep the lot it wouldn't concern me
I just hope she rejects all overtures and gets him in the witness box
 
TwelveAngryMen said:
Well you thought is was a point well made by Mates and I thought you might be reassured by BFC's reply that charitable donations are intended from any settlement / award
Equally if she wanted to keep the lot it wouldn't concern me
I just hope she rejects all overtures and gets him in the witness box
Click to expand...
Looks to me like Mates did make a good point. From the documents in the public domain in the US I can’t see any evidence that VG has donated “a substantial amount” to her charity. Unless something less than 50k USD amounts to substantial of course.

Anyway I’m sure Lost will shortly be posting “source” in response to BFC’s claim and BFC Will then no doubt provide evidence to back up his claim.
 
TwelveAngryMen said:
Well you thought is was a point well made by Mates and I thought you might be reassured by BFC's reply that charitable donations are intended from any settlement / award
Equally if she wanted to keep the lot it wouldn't concern me
I just hope she rejects all overtures and gets him in the witness box
Click to expand...

That point appears to have been superseded.

What I'm interested in is how she has supposedly become a multi-millionaire, unless she has extorted the money from other high profile figures.
 
That point appears to have been superseded.

Lost Seasider said:
I’m not sure it has been superseded has it?
Click to expand...

I’m not sure it has been superseded has it?

If VG claims she’s donated “a substantial amount” from previous settlements to her charity and it transpires she hasn’t, then that goes to the question of her credibility. Fib about one thing and you may be fibbing about other things.
 
Lost Seasider said:
That point appears to have been superseded.

What I'm interested in is how she has supposedly become a multi-millionaire, unless she has extorted the money from other high profile figures.
Click to expand...
The Oxford dictionary defines ' to extort ' as

the crime of making somebody give you something by threatening them.

So can we add that to her CV along with sex trafficking ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top