Andrew arrested!

[Tashyboy]

Anyone else think this has been meticulously planned?

I think there’s a lot that we still don’t know about, and it’s going to be interesting how this plays out.Am just glad his mother is not around to see this play out.

 

[Sid Rixon IV]

As far as I understand 'lapses in procedure' is not an arrestable offence and if you mean his security by 'real protection team' what on earththis got to do with his elder brother (at the time he wasn't Head of State)?

It seems as if people are trying to create new offences and conspiracies to suit their agendas - I suppose this is the new reality in this world.

I'm not sure why you mention the "older brother" in replying to my post. I neither mentioned nor alluded to him.
"Lapses in procedure" by A's personal guard are being investigated by another Force because of alleged "blind eyes" being turned to appease him.
And, of course, as yet these are simply investigations.
So, no agenda here, just a contribution to a thread.

 

[Arthur Wedge]

If you're talking about Neil Todd, the abuse started in 1991 when Todd was 17 and and Ball was 60 and continued until Ball was cautioned in 1993.
Ball admitted the abuse of 18 young men over a period of 15 years from 1977 to 1992.
In 1993 he was cautioned by police and didn't prosecute Ball for his sexual assault on the 2 boys 13 and 15.
''A caution is commonly used to resolve cases where full prosecution is not seen as the most appropriate solution. Accepting a caution requires an admission of guilt.''
So he admitted assaulting young boys between 1977 and 1992, five had encountered Ball while they were still at school. At least one abusive encounter took place on school premises.
The only reason other offences weren't taken into account and the caution was given was because the prosecutions had to start within 12 months of the offence being committed and any more scandal would only harm the church

1. He was not a convicted peadophile when he attended the wedding of Charles and Camilla

2. Please provide the law that Charles broke


Charles has not committed a crime when it comes to Ball

What Ball did is not a reflection on Charles

Through all the waffle you still havent provided what Charles should be arrested for

 

[Voyager EMH]

On his way back to the farm.

 

[D-S]

I'm not sure why you mention the "older brother" in replying to my post. I neither mentioned nor alluded to him.
"Lapses in procedure" by A's personal guard are being investigated by another Force because of alleged "blind eyes" being turned to appease him.
And, of course, as yet these are simply investigations.
So, no agenda here, just a contribution to a thread.

I was referring to his older brother because you were responding to my response to someone who was dragging his elder brother into this topic for some reason.

 

[bobmac]

1. He was not a convicted peadophile when he attended the wedding of Charles and Camilla

2. Please provide the law that Charles broke


Charles has not committed a crime when it comes to Ball

What Ball did is not a reflection on Charles

Through all the waffle you still havent provided what Charles should be arrested for

Please direct me to the post where I said he did.
I was merely pointing out what a vile man Ball was and with the special branch behind him, he must have known who Ball was in 1993, a self confessed sexual abuser of children. And if you don't see the similarities with Andrew and Epstein, I'm not going to repeat myself.
He knew

 

[Arthur Wedge]

Please direct me to the post where I said he did.

Your first post

“When will the same thing happen to Charles”

I was merely pointing out what a vile man Ball was and with the special branch behind him, he must have known who Ball was in 1993, a self confessed sexual abuser of children. And if you don't see the similarities with Andrew and Epstein, I'm not going to repeat myself.
He knew

There is zero comparison between Andrews “connections” to Epstein and Charles and Ball


“He knew” - again not a statement of facts

 

[Hobbit]

*** please can we stay on track and avoid questionable speculation… ***

Edit; we’ve had suggestions the thread be locked. I’d rather we didn’t do that but ‘keep it clean’ please.

 

[Pin-seeker]

Not one person on this forum has a clue what’s really gone on.
Just like The Epstein files will never truly be released.
Too many nonces & wrong ens with too much power for that to happen.
Maybe a few will be thrown under the bus to “please people”.
But it won’t be the big names.

IMO of course

 

[Lucifer MorningStar]

Not one person on this forum has a clue what’s really gone on.
Just like The Epstein files will never truly be released.
Too many nonces & wrong ens with too much power for that to happen.
Maybe a few will be thrown under the bus to “please people”.
But it won’t be the big names.

IMO of course

How dare you come on here and speak sense man! Go and have a word with yourself

 

[Hobbit]

Not one person on this forum has a clue what’s really gone on.
Just like The Epstein files will never truly be released.
Too many nonces & wrong ens with too much power for that to happen.
Maybe a few will be thrown under the bus to “please people”.
But it won’t be the big names.

IMO of course

I’ve been following the Congressional hearings surrounding the release of the files, and the Congressmen’s interviews after they’ve viewed the un-redacted files. Personally, from what little I’ve heard I don’t want to know the detail, I only hope that those that are guilty are crucified for what I’ve heard.

 

[Pin-seeker]

I’ve been following the Congressional hearings surrounding the release of the files, and the Congressmen’s interviews after they’ve viewed the un-redacted files. Personally, from what little I’ve heard I don’t want to know the detail, I only hope that those that are guilty are crucified for what I’ve heard.

Agreed,but I doubt the most powerful ones will be.
Let’s just say Ex presidents & members of Royal families were involved.
That would cause massive issues globally.

 

[D-S]

To understand some of the background on this I would thoroughly recommend’Filthy Rich’, the documentary on Netflix. It finishes just after his death so doesn’t include the revelations in the files since, however it does show exactly what this is all about with very telling testimonies from those involved especially law enforcement who were on to him very early on.
As horrifying the crimes are, what really shocks is the amount of power he wielded to escape justice for so long and how he could manipulate and bypass the judiciary to get away with it.
If you haven’t seen it, please do.

 

[Sid Rixon IV]

I was referring to his older brother because you were responding to my response to someone who was dragging his elder brother into this topic for some reason.

Your post 39
No mention of older brother.
My response 45
No mention of older brother
Your post 51
I'm asked why I refer to older brother
My post 62.
"I didn't".
Your post 65 above.
"I was referring to older brother because you were referring to my post to someone else who referred to older brother".

Your Honour, may we approach the bench?

 

[Arthur Wedge]

I’ve been following the Congressional hearings surrounding the release of the files, and the Congressmen’s interviews after they’ve viewed the un-redacted files. Personally, from what little I’ve heard I don’t want to know the detail, I only hope that those that are guilty are crucified for what I’ve heard.

Some of the stuff is shocking

And the Attorney General - what a disgraceful human being she is

 

[D-S]

Your post 39
No mention of older brother.
My response 45
No mention of older brother
Your post 51
I'm asked why I refer to older brother
My post 62.
"I didn't".
Your post 65 above.
"I was referring to older brother because you were referring to my post to someone else who referred to older brother".

Your Honour, may we approach the bench?

See my post 33 replying to an accusation about the elder brother, see my post 39, again the same but was a follow on to 33. All my posts in this thread were responding to someone saying they expected the king to be next to be arrested, nothing else.

My posts in this #39 “I think we all know that he (Andrew) has been arrested for leaking government information to people in the US. Being friends with someone is not why he was arrested.”
This was in reference to someone saying that the King was ‘friends with an unsavoury character’, I was saying that this was not the offence for which Andrew was arrested.
You were, probably unknowingly and inadvertently, responding to a post about accusations about the King, hence I thought your comments did not have relevance to what I was saying.