 You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
nealglover - arms dealer, or someone who promotes the sale of arms - is there really a significant difference IYO?
@grum, Ian Watkins got 35 years - I was making the comparison that someone who gets 18 months probably hasn't committed a "notorious" crime. A serious crime yes but not a "notorious one"
Well I believe the whole case being heard at the moment is arguing he should have received a much, much longer sentence but didn't because of his wealth and connections to people like Prince Andrew. It's also pretty shabby whataboutery to compare it to the Ian Watkins case and say 'well at least it wasn't as bad as that'.
And how anyone can claim the British arms trade is something to be proud of is truly beyond me.
aa - not there is nothing remotely dodgy in assisting in promoting British business including weapons.
In your opinion, many others disagree
Have you ever thought why French ski resorts such as Courchevel have fallen from favour with the rich and famous in recent years?
If you read the local papers in Courchevel and Verbier it's blindingly obvious why. One has ads for cars, houses and lost dogs, the other for sex workers. [url= http://www.rz-online.ch/zeitung/thema-der-woche/2013-46/prostitution-im-wallis ]An amusing link for those who read German.[/url]
grum - Member
And how anyone can claim the British arms trade is something to be proud of is truly beyond me.
Because money?
[url= http://newsthump.com/2015/01/05/duke-of-york-strenuously-denies-he-had-ten-thousand-men/ ]another sexual scandal[/url]
Have you ever thought why French ski resorts such as Courchevel have fallen from favour with the rich and famous in recent years?
The property prices and level of building work there at present suggest it hasn't fallen out of favour with everyone. It may be that the increasing number of rich and rude Russians has persuaded many people that other places are more pleasant and better value options.
Don't get me started on the tossers who think they have a claim over Cornwall.
pfffft
True or False?
Prince Andrew and Duchess of York
AND
Prince Charles and Diana
[b]had Jimmy Savile as a marriage counsellor[/b]?
[img] 
[/img]
True
True
Unknown
do I win ?
Aye, what do you prefer, custard cream or bourbon?
[s]live rodents[/s] err, custard cream please
Steady on Richard Gere!!
Bloody 3d scanner is on the blink, and what's more, just realized that you didn't quite make the grade:
True
True
True
is the correct answer...
Nonetheless, kindly soul that I am, I'll have to give you some more tasty info to chew on...
[url= http://www.radiotimes.com/news/2014-12-29/bbc-pulls-controversial-royal-documentary-about-spin-after-death-of-princess-diana ]Here is an article regarding the cancelling of a documentary which was due to be shown last night, detailing how Prince Charles used spin doctors after the death of Diana[/url]
(Not sure if spin doctors wrote article?)
The funny thing is, the documentary which the Royals stopped airing on the BBC is about how they influence the media. Point proved?
Captions please for Eduk's and JHJ's photos:
nealglover - arms dealer, or someone who promotes the sale of arms - is there really a significant difference IYO?
There are differences yes. But wether prince Andrew is guilty of sexual offences doesn't rely on the definition of either of them.
And how anyone can claim the British arms trade is something to be proud of is truly beyond me.
I agree.
Did anyone do that ?
[img] 
[/img]
Queenie pays more tax than Starbucks iirc.
Possibly, but she makes a good deal less coffee.
Considering what crap, watery bilge Starbucks churns out, I consider that a Very Good Thing.
And if she did, I'm sure the quality would be top-notch.
jivehoneyjive - Member
True or False?Prince Andrew and Duchess of York
AND
Prince Charles and Diana
had Jimmy Savile as a marriage counsellor?
So? This has been gone over relentlessly because of your obsession with it. Here's a good expression for you: hindsight is 20:20 vision. Do you understand the significance in this context?
Do you understand the significance in this context?
Very much so, do you?
How was Savile allowed to get so close, [url= 
]given vetting procedures[/url]?
[img] 
[/img]
[url= http://www.scribd.com/doc/246043736/35-reasons-why-the-Royal-Family-must-be-compelled-to-answer-police-questions-for-the-UK-s-Inquiry-into-Child-Sexual-Abuse ]And why is there so many similar instances where offenders close to the Royals slipped through the net[/url]
All very odd...
[img] 
[/img]
Very odd indeed:
[img] [/img]
Now, about those hidden cameras that Epstein had...
To be honest, you don't have to be 'establishment' to install hidden cameras.
Landlord in a local pub in Northamptonshire got done for that. No chance I'd want to see his clientele use the bogs, and they are not the crowd to fear a pub dump either.
In Epstein's case there was clearly a case to answer because (from the stuff I've seen anyway) while the incidents he was involved in appear to have been consentual some of the girls involved were below the age of consent and there are strong grounds that he must have been aware of that. I think it's the latter point (i.e. whether he must have been aware of it) that led the prosecution to do a plea bargain with him though because they weren't sure they'd be able to get a conviction based on the evidence they had (although it looks like the police and prosecution disagree on that).
In Prince Andrew's case even if the allegations are true then what he's being accused of is that he had sex with a 17 year old girl in 3 different locations, but that in all of which 17 would have been above the age of consent. Very sleazy yes, but criminal no.
In Prince Andrew's case even if the allegations are true then what he's being accused of is that he had sex with a 17 year old girl in 3 different locations, but that in all of which 17 would have been above the age of consent. Very sleazy yes, but criminal no.
Not quite true,if the girl was a prostitute then it is illegal if she is under 18.
The whole thing is incredibly sleazy.
Not quite true,if the girl was a prostitute then it is illegal if she is under 18.
I don't think there is any allegation that Prince Andrew paid her or would have been aware she was a prostitute though. If Epstein paid her directly (although at that point it sounds more like she was a mistress being kept by Epstein than a prostitute) to have sex with Prince Andrew (and he wasn't aware of it) then I think the crime would have been Epsteins. In any case I don't think she's alleging that she was specifically paid to have sex with Prince Andrew.
At this point I don't think any of the allegations point to an actual crime by Prince Andrew.
The whole thing is incredibly sleazy.
Of that there is no doubt.
Think epicsteve has summed this up for me, based on current evidence. Was probably wrong of me to chuckle at the Matt cartoon on the front the Torygraph today though.
Epstein had a large number of underage girls, some as young as 12:
[img] 
[/img]
Given allegations of an orgy involving Andrew on island with Russian girls, we'll have to see who else comes forward, though they may have already been scared off:
[img] 
[/img]
Hey... whats the problem.....?
[img] 
[/img]
I don't think there is any allegation that Prince Andrew paid her or would have been aware she was a prostitute though.
Whilst I've always been under the impression that Andrew is thick as a brick I think think he's street wise enough to know what's going on. Everything he does is for money and everything anyone does for him is ultimately for money.
We are not disputing Epstein abused under age girls. He went to jail for it. As part of securing that conviction he entered into a plea bargain. The girls lawyers are challenging that plea bargain (which was agreed in what 2009 ?)
As posted above the "allegation" is that Prince Andrew slept with a 17 year old, that's an offense is she was a prostitute but not if she was not.
Its quite clear that this public mudslinging from the US lawyers naming high profile individuals is an attempt at trial by media.
As people have said if the girls lawyers think there is a case to answer they should file a lawsuit against the individuals.
I'm no fan of Berlusconi but the age of consent in Italy is 14 (correct me if I am wrong), there are similar laws regarding minimum age for prostitutes (16 or 18 I believe).
Surely we're in dangerous new territory, if we're using Silvio as a benchmark for acceptable behaviour? 😆
When I am with a woman I always think to myself what would Silvio do ?
Dont you ?
Now you come to mention it.....
Question, and apologies if it's been answered but I can't see any mention of it here or in the news.
Where were Virginia Roberts parents throughout her alleged time as a sex slave? From her own story this began at age 15. Were her parents around and allowing her to hang out with a guy 3+ times her age and allowed her to travel the world with him???
As posted above the "allegation" is that Prince Andrew slept with a 17 year old, that's an offense is she was a prostitute but not if she was not.
The allegation is that he slept with a 17 year old who was coerced into doing so. Whether or not laws were broken, if the allegation is true, then his behaviour is not what we expect(*) from our glorious rulers.
(*) By 'expect' I mean 'hope for', as in "England expects that every man will do his duty". Of course it is precisely what we think is likely.
then his behaviour is not what we expect(*) from our glorious rulers.
Its a big leap of imagination for me to think of Prince Andrew as one of our "rulers". What exactly does he rule ?
The latest thing about Prince Andrew I was reading today that he had quite a few men 'up a hill' and then had them down again. Apparently when they were up they were up, the article was saying, and when they were down... you get the picture.
Its a big leap of imagination for me to think of Prince Andrew as one of our "rulers". What exactly does he rule ?
I am amazed the BBC have not drawn a link... ( 😉 for those in doubt )
[img] 
[/img]
[url= http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/prince-andrew-sex-claim-sex-slave-diary-published-containing-intimate-details-of-virginia-roberts-alleged-encounter-with-fifth-in-line-to-throne-9978015.html ]plot thickens [/url]
Not really thickening, just more salacious details of what was morally reprehensible but possibly not actually criminal.
My sympathy for victims tends to diminish when stories are sold on to the Press. The only people victims should be giving the details to are juries, until the "accused" has been cleared or convicted.
It's a tricky balance~ on the one hand you have a point, but on the other,
a)It could be a means of protecting the witness; such high level publicity lessens the likelihood of an 'accidental death' in the run up to the trial
b) Such high profile/powerful names may require public pressure to ensure a fair trial... see above for how Alan Dershowitz (now implicated) pressured victims.
Interesting...
[img] 
[/img]
so leon britains died, looks like that dossier will never be found now.....
prince andrew was conveniently out of the country, probably at a Taken style sex slave auction in Davos ;-), so it wasnt him
Couldn't happen to a nicer family.
I spotted this on fb today. Made me think of jhj. 😆
CONSPIRACY!!!!
https://thecolemanexperience.wordpress.com/2014/08/05/the-mysterious-death-of-bbc-dj-mike-smith/
Gee thanks nemesis, it's like Christmas all over again 😆
Daresay there is a few truths in there~ the network surrounding Jill Dando is certainly interesting, but not rushing to believe the entire article.
However, there is more evidence emerging daily of the tangled web surrounding Jeffrey Epstein...
[url= http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/theroyalfamily/11359788/Prince-Andrew-under-renewed-pressure-to-speak-about-sex-abuse-claims-after-flight-logs-emerge.html ]
Firstly, we have flight logs which back up claims made by Virgina Roberts with regard to Prince Andrew[/url]
Yes, this Prince Andrew:
[img] 
[/img]
[url= http://gawker.com/flight-logs-put-clinton-dershowitz-on-pedophile-billio-1681039971 ]Further flight logs also show both Bill Clinton and Alan Dershowtiz also have some answering to do[/url]
Yes, this Bill Clinton:
and this Alan Dershowitz:
[img] 
[/img]
It's got to the point where as soon as JHJ shouts 'conspiracy' and/or 'cover up' I tend to assume there really isn't one.
Probably for the best, wouldn't want to worry your pretty little head about it...
are you any good at massage?
Andrew looks like a fun-loving Peter Hitchens.
It's got to the point where as soon as JHJ shouts 'conspiracy' and/or 'cover up' I tend to assume there really isn't one.
You're not the only one.
[img] 
?298603a24e8d51915fce203907ff2746e482a5a6[/img]
It's got to the point where as soon as JHJ shouts 'conspiracy' and/or 'cover up' I tend to assume there really isn't one.
Which is displaying pretty much the same lack of critical thinking that everyone slags off JHJ for.
[i]Which is displaying pretty much the same lack of critical thinking that everyone slags off JHJ for. [/i]
🙂
It's 'cos I'm a one of the conspirators.
I still think Jive is the False Flag operation tbh
That poor wolf has fallen off it's bike. Not surprising really with all those panniers and handlebar bags, wouldn't have happened with STW approved custom frame bags and tent poles neatly stowed in the rectal cavity.
[url= http://gawker.com/here-is-pedophile-billionaire-jeffrey-epsteins-little-b-1681383992 ]Jeffrey Epsteins contacts book in full[/url]
An address book that's been "adapted" by a bloke who failed to hand over evidence relevant to the investigation, and tried to sell it instead, (after he had adapted it himself to make it more sellable)
Not exactly great evidence of anything really is it.
What makes these situations more difficult to understand is a combination of people trying to make money from the situation along with media sensationalism.
For example - did Prince Andrew have sex with the girl? Maybe - but even if he did it's unlikely he'd committed a crime. She appears to have been over the age of consent in any jurisdiction in which it happened, if she was an underage prostitute then someone else was paying and Andrew probably wasn't aware (same true on any "transporting" type crimes), and the mentions of being forced to do it seems unlikely based on the way the girl has described the situation herself. Crimes quite likely were committed involving the girl (and even committed by her as she's said that she found other young girls to do the same sort of thing).
It looks like the girl in question wants to make some cash by writing a book and the more high-profile celebs she can name the more cash that's likely to bring in. That muddies the water about crimes possibly committed againt her because she might well have some retrospective issues with what happened to her, but that's not the only reason why all the media coverage might be good from her perspective.
What it's all led to is a certain cynicism when these cases first become public.
She was under the age of legal consent in the juristiction area that they had sex iirc
Was it not 18 in Florida?
Much to be cycnical about but staying friends with a convicted child prostitute user is , at the very least, poor judgement from an "ambassador"
If it was an actual job rather than accident of birth it would have cost him it IMHO
She was under the age of legal consent in the juristiction area that they had sex iirc
Being under the age of consent in Florida is what the press seem to always report, but it sounded to me like that wasn't one of the locations - and that the age of consent was 17 in all of the ones mentioned.
Just as an aside, What would happen (legally) if a married couple from England, both 17, go to Florida for their Honeymoon ?
Just as an aside, What would happen (legally) if a married couple from England, both 17, go to Florida for their Honeymoon ?
As long as the eldest person is 23 or under then it's legal to have sex in Florida from the age of 16.
Now that is an interesting take on the age of consent!
For example - did Prince Andrew have sex with the girl? Maybe - but even if he did it's unlikely he'd committed a crime. She appears to have been over the age of consent in any jurisdiction in which it happened, if she was an underage prostitute then someone else was paying and Andrew probably wasn't aware (same true on any "transporting" type crimes), and the mentions of being forced to do it seems unlikely based on the way the girl has described the situation herself. Crimes quite likely were committed involving the girl (and even committed by her as she's said that she found other young girls to do the same sort of thing).
Ah so he just had teenage girls provided for him to have sex with and didn't bother to question whether they were being paid/coerced. Interesting sense of morality you've got there.
[url= http://www.itv.com/news/2015-01-22/prince-andrew-had-orgy-with-nine-girls/ ]Let's not forget Prince Andrew's 9 girl orgy[/url]
Given Epstein's recruitment of girls (some as young as 12):
[img] 
:large[/img]
[img] [/img]
We'll have to see what other witnesses are brave enough to come forward after Dershowitz's intimidation tactics from last time:
[img] [/img]
Just why Epstein got such a lenient sentence when Jeb Bush was Governor of Florida is possibly worth investigating too...
Well well, seems it's not just Tony Blair who has questions to answer about his financial dealings with Epstein:
[img] [/img]
/p>
The HSBC leaks have also uncovered that [url= http://radaronline.com/exclusives/2015/02/jeffrey-epstein-secret-clinton-donation/ ]Epstein sent Bill Clinton $3.5 Billion after the investigation into his recruitment of underage sex slaves began[/url]
Bit more [url= http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/feb/10/hillary-clinton-foundation-donors-hsbc-swiss-bank ]here[/url]
million not billion, typo or an attempt to deceive ? $3.5 billion was never credible.
Much as I'd like to pretend it was a typo, I made a boob~ for some reason I'd read it as billion...
Still highly questionable, now, if you can provide the facts requested on the other thread, I'd be very grateful 😉