Andrew arrested!

[bobmac]

I’m confused weren’t you just the other day calling for Charles to be collared even though he’s never done anything but you had him guilty by association to some clergyman from years ago but now you’re stating innocent until proven guilty .

Andrew had his military rank and his HRH title removed in 2022 by his brother with no evidence

 

[D-S]

Waste of time and effort to be removing him from the list.
He has had, and will have, only one direction on list - downwards.
OK - he moves up one place when a monarch dies, but births to bump him down occur more frequently over time. He was 2nd when he was born and there has been only one death.
If he lives well into his 90s, he could end up about 16th - 20th. And no one will care very much or at all.
I mean really - Lilibet is before him and she is more than 60 years younger.

(Princess Alexandra was 6th in line when she was born, she presented the cup at the 1968 FA cup final, she is 58th in line now and many people have no idea who she is.)

The chap has no future.
It will be interesting to see "The law take its course" but he is, after all, just one of a great many very seriously questionable people linked with a scumbag of the lowest order.
Our attention might be better directed to others from now on.

It begs the questions if the succession list is absolutely meaningless then why does it exist?
How far down does it need to go?
How bad do you have to be to be removed from a list of names that guarantees that you become extremely powerful just by surviving those above you?
For example if Huw Edwards is 3 millionth on the list is that ok?
This inaction highlights the arguments against privilege and power by birth and nothing else, irrespective of your actions and competence.
They need to clear this up otherwise the ambivalent will turn against them.

 

[Lucifer MorningStar]

Andrew had his military rank and his HRH title removed in 2022 by his brother with no evidence

Bit different removing an honorary rank and royal title to reduce the number of Royals and potential image of the Military and family to being convicted in a court of law.

Also doesn’t coincide with your wanting Charles arrested for known association to someone that hadn’t been convicted but now stating innocent till proven guilty by law! But let’s not argue actual facts shall we

 

[Hobbit]

Although 8th on the list of succession, he’s only 3 deaths away from regent until William’s & Harry’s children reach maturity. Charles isn’t young nor healthy. Two accidents after Charles and Andrew becomes regent.

Parliament needs to act sooner rather than later.

 

[D-S]

Although 8th on the list of succession, he’s only 3 deaths away from regent until William’s & Harry’s children reach maturity. Charles isn’t young nor healthy. Two accidents after Charles and Andrew becomes regent.

Parliament needs to act sooner rather than later.

See posts 133, 139 and 142.

They should have acted months/years ago.

 

[bobmac]

Also doesn’t coincide with your wanting Charles arrested for known association to someone that hadn’t been convicted but now stating innocent till proven guilty by law! But let’s not argue actual facts shall we

You dont see the hypocrisy between Charles stripping his brother in 2022 for his association with Epstein with no proof, while Charles defended a Bishop who admitted raping boys as young as 13 in 1993 and was later convicted for subsequent offences in 2015?
Andrew has lost everything due to his association with Epstein
Charles lost nothing despite his association with a self confessed rapist Bishop

 

[Lucifer MorningStar]

You dont see the hypocrisy between Charles stripping his brother in 2022 for his association with Epstein with no proof, while Charles defended a Bishop who admitted raping boys as young as 13 in 1993 and was later convicted for subsequent offences in 2015?
Andrew has lost everything due to his association with Epstein
Charles lost nothing despite his association with a self confessed rapist Bishop

You’ve already had the facts pointed out to you over this by another forum member but don’t let those facts blind your own hypocrisy regarding innocent till proven guilty or that stripping someone of family titles and honorary military titles get in the way of proven guilty in the eyes or the law.

Using your own words often spouted on here!! I’m out

 

[D-S]

You dont see the hypocrisy between Charles stripping his brother in 2022 for his association with Epstein with no proof, while Charles defended a Bishop who admitted raping boys as young as 13 in 1993 and was later convicted for subsequent offences in 2015?
Andrew has lost everything due to his association with Epstein
Charles lost nothing despite his association with a self confessed rapist Bishop

I know this has been said before on this thread but this sentence highlighted above is simply not true.

He has not ‘lost everything’ due to his association with Epstein. Epstein victims had association with him, no doubt hundreds of innocent people had association with Epstein.

Andrew lost everything due to what he did when in Epstein’s company, what he paid to one of Epsteins victims, what he gave to Epstein in terms of UK privileged knowledge, the fact that he refused to give witness to the US authorities about what he knew about Epstein and to how he lied about these things repeatedly in public.

Association isn’t the charge, it’s AM’s behaviour and actions.

 

[bobmac]

Association isn’t the charge, it’s AM’s behaviour and actions.

So what has he been charged with?

 

[D-S]

As far as I understand nothing as yet but improper conduct in public office relating to confidential information that he gave to Epstein when ‘working’ as a trade envoy is what has been said/alleged.

 

[clubchamp98]

So what has he been charged with?

Nothing yet.
We won’t find out until he is charged!

 

[bobmac]

As far as I understand nothing as yet but improper conduct in public office relating to confidential information that he gave to Epstein when ‘working’ as a trade envoy is what has been said/alleged.

Exactlty, arrested, but not charged but been booted out of the royal household. As I said guilty until proven innocent

 

[clubchamp98]

Exactlty, arrested, but not charged but been booted out of the royal household. As I said guilty until proven innocent

Well it cost his mum and dad £12 million to keep him out of court.

That’s a family matter though.

 

[Arthur Wedge]

So what has he been charged with?

Paying someone £15mil helps avoid charges

You have Charles guilty by association

As we all know there is a little bit more than association when it comes to Andrew and Epstein

 

[bobmac]

Well it cost his mum and dad £12 million to keep him out of court.

''The exact amount was not officially disclosed, but it is widely reported to be in the range of £3 million to £12 million.''
But irrelevant to the discussion

 

[Voyager EMH]

1. It begs the questions if the succession list is absolutely meaningless then why does it exist?
2. How far down does it need to go?
3. How bad do you have to be to be removed from a list of names that guarantees that you become extremely powerful just by surviving those above you?
4. For example if Huw Edwards is 3 millionth on the list is that ok?
5. This inaction highlights the arguments against privilege and power by birth and nothing else, irrespective of your actions and competence.
6. They need to clear this up otherwise the ambivalent will turn against them.

1. It is not absolutely meaningless. It exists because we have a hereditary monarchy.
2. As far as anyone who is bothered to list it and then cares to.
3. You don't have to be "bad" but it can happen for a variety of reasons. Converting to Catholicism was one such reason.
4. Red herring.
5. It does not highlight it for me, it is something I've been very aware of for a considerable length of time. I do not think I'm unusual in this respect. Unfairness is inherent in society.
6. I think steps will be taken to remove him from the list. But it won't alter his or anyone's life whether he is removed from the list or not.
He will never be an untitled regent, because he will never have royal duties.
Clearing this up - this will be a statement from the King at some point. I will wait for it.

 

[clubchamp98]

''The exact amount was not officially disclosed, but it is widely reported to be in the range of £3 million to £12 million.''

I have only ever heard £12 million.

The amount really dosnt matter.

This family paid off a complaint to keep him out of court to not upset the Queens party.
This would probably be all over years ago if they hadn’t done that.

Maybe that’s why the Kings angry he may of disagreed with that payoff.

We’re just guessing until he’s charged by the old bill
Everything else is a family matter.

 

[Billysboots]

I think the time has come to draw a line under this one, folks.

What started as a discussion regarding Andrew’s arrest on Thursday has deviated significantly, with comment regarding the King’s alleged association with a member of the clergy with a dodgy past, along with the expected speculation regarding the allegations relating to any involvement Andrew may or may not have had in Epstein’s murky world.

I had asked that comments were confined to known facts, and we have allowed considerable latitude, but it’s clear this thread will only end badly.

So it’s now locked to prevent further replies.