Andrew arrested!

[Robster59]

This is amazing. I'm happy to see "the rule of law" is alive and well across the pond. As a student of history I have always thought our form of government here in the US was the best. However, I'm beginning to wonder if the Parliamentary system might be slightly better. I've commented on this forum many times that if I didn't have such a large family here, I would seriously consider a move to Scotland. Obviously, that was initially related to my love of golf. While that is still true, I think the way your government functions would be an added benefit. As the 250th birthday of the US approaches, my family and I find it hard to celebrate due to all the chaos that is happening here.
Anyway, Spring is approaching, the grass will turn green soon and we're only a month or so away from The Players, The Majors and all the wonderful DP World Tour events we all love.

This is the real issue at the moment. There seem to be quite a few non Americans being named, but all the big US names are not being revealed. This is a mixture of diversionary tactics and self preservation by those currently in power IMHO. How long they can keep this up for I don't know, but hopefully those responsible for perpetrating the crimes, and those responsible for covering it up will hopefully be brought to task.

 

[Sid Rixon IV]

I can see Farage bringing David Icke into the fold.

 

[PhilTheFragger]

I’m interested as to why they specifically arrested AMW on his birthday.
I have absolutely no regard for the man, but my British sense of fair play initially feels that this is poor form.

They could have done it the day before, or the day after, would it have made a difference?

Or is it tactics to catch him off guard and make him properly sweat?

And yes, if AMW has been arrested for possible misconduct in public office then they should be doing the same to Mandleson

 

[PhilTheFragger]

And the news reports this morning saying that it’s a huge crisis for the Royal Family….
I disagree, they have already taken steps to mitigate the impact, Taking away his titles, moving him to Sandringham, cutting him off etc

He is disgraced beyond repair and if he is found guilty, then I have no doubt that Charles will have him removed from the line of succession.which I believe requires an act of Parliament.

The only reason it’s a crisis is the news is creating one,

What it does show is that nobody is above the law, maybe our friends in the USA should be taking notes

 

[Hobbit]

And the news reports this morning saying that it’s a huge crisis for the Royal Family….
I disagree, they have already taken steps to mitigate the impact, Taking away his titles, moving him to Sandringham, cutting him off etc

He is disgraced beyond repair and if he is found guilty, then I have no doubt that Charles will have him removed from the line of succession.which I believe requires an act of Parliament.

The only reason it’s a crisis is the news is creating one,

What it does show is that nobody is above the law, maybe our friends in the USA should be taking notes

He’s not the first of the ‘global elite’ to have his collar felt by a national law enforcement agency over links to Epstein. The UN HCR has been pushing for while that the relevant steps are taken against those involved in what they perceive to be the global reach of Epstein’s spider’s web of criminality. One comment attributed to the UN HCR is the suggestion that Epstein operated a honey trap. Perhaps Andrew might use that in mitigation, although that won’t absolve him from his actions.

And the UN have been shouting on behalf of the victims for some time, “crimes against humanity” - I wonder why the USA has withdrawn funding from so many UN organisations?

 

[Lord Tyrion]

I’m interested as to why they specifically arrested AMW on his birthday.
I have absolutely no regard for the man, but my British sense of fair play initially feels that this is poor form.

Are you suggesting that the police should check for birthdays in future before acting? Really? Across all criminality, because we have to be even in all of this. I wouldn't have a clue when the blokes birthday is, not sure many would outside of the royal press.

That's a bizarre one.

 

[Voyager EMH]

They arrested him and then searched the houses. Anything incriminating about anything is what I imagine they were looking for.

No need as yet to do exactly that with Mandleson, but I would imagine that he is under investigation in a similar way.

Time will tell for both of them. Their time will run out eventually, but not quickly.

Misconduct while in public office. This is a very tricky process for police and Crown Prosecution. No quick route to conviction.
It will drag on with lots of further media speculation and cover-up conspiracy theories. This will be a huge waste of time.

https://cdn.websitebuilder.service.justice.gov.uk/uploads/sites/54/2025/12/MIPO-final-summary.pdf

 

[Bunkermagnet]

I am glad he has been arrested and the process started. But lets see the US law enforcement agencies also start to do their stuff against those who are American and are named.

 

[Billysboots]

They arrested him and then searched the houses. Anything incriminating about anything is what I imagine they were looking for.

That’s not really how it works.

Assuming the post arrest searches were conducted using the powers included in S18 of PACE, the search is confined to evidence related to the offence for which a suspect is under arrest, or connected/similar offences. The officers searching are not on a free ticket to look for and seize material related to other matters.

Of course, in this case it is very likely that electronic devices are a high priority given the alleged exchanges of emails, so it is always a possibility that evidence relating to other offences may be found when they are examined.

But the police cannot use their search powers as a free pass to look for just anything.

 

[Tashyboy]

What has he been found guilty of?

The list is endless.

 

[Bunkermagnet]

The list is endless.

As yet, he hasn't been found guilty of anything.
It may be different in the court of public opinion, but not so in the eyes of the law

 

[Tashyboy]

Bit of a bummer for Andrew, the stripper was booked to jump out of his cake at midday and was cancelled

 

[Tashyboy]

As yet, he hasn't been found guilty of anything.
It may be different in the court of public opinion, but not so in the eyes of the law

Yup I get that. But what has really done me is the guffrie family have been asking for an enquiry into this and it seems to have gone nowhere, but a public office charge and the police are in. I think a door has been opened and it could well be interesting times ahead. And I don’t think Andrew will be the last.
Also I agree with Fragger. Re Mandleson. How has he not been charged. Not sure if folk have seen it but Norway is also having its issues re links with Epstein.

 

[Voyager EMH]

That’s not really how it works.

Assuming the post arrest searches were conducted using the powers included in S18 of PACE, the search is confined to evidence related to the offence for which a suspect is under arrest, or connected/similar offences. The officers searching are not on a free ticket to look for and seize material related to other matters.

Of course, in this case it is very likely that electronic devices are a high priority given the alleged exchanges of emails, so it is always a possibility that evidence relating to other offences may be found when they are examined.

But the police cannot use their search powers as a free pass to look for just anything.

But if they find evidence of other wrongdoing in the proper process of their investigation and search, are they not duty bound to deal with it appropriately and not ignore it?
And being merely aware of this possibility before searching - does this not amount to the same thing as looking for anything incriminating, in reality?

 

[Billysboots]

But if they find evidence of other wrongdoing in the proper process of their investigation and search, are they not duty bound to deal with it appropriately and not ignore it?
And being merely aware of this possibility before searching - does this not amount to the same thing as looking for anything incriminating, in reality?

Yes, they can still seize potential evidence from unrelated offences under S19 PACE, but the point is they can’t just go looking for anything. The focus of the search must still be the offence for which the detainee is in custody for, or like offences.

The analogy I always used when explaining search powers to young in service officers was that, if you have someone in custody for theft of a motor vehicle, and are searching for evidence of that or a like offence, then unless you are searching for documents relating to the offence or something similarly small, you shouldn’t really be looking in a drawer in a bedside table.

 

[Bunkermagnet]

Yup I get that. But what has really done me is the gunfire family have been asking for an enquiry into this and it seems to have gone nowhere, but a public office charge and the police are in. I think a door has been opened and it could well be interesting times ahead. And I don’t think Andrew will be the last.
Also I agree with Fragger. Re Mandleson. How has he not been charged. Not sure if folk have seen it but Norway is also having its issues re links with Epstein.

Sometimes things aren't straightforward. Al Capone was convicted of tax evasion. To me, the Americans are avoiding looking to hard into it knowing there will be many with money and power who will be caught.
Mandy will be charged at some time no doubt, but I would say the police are probably collecting evidence to be able to provide a solid charge and lead to a conviction.

 

[rulefan]

The list is endless.

Which offences has he been found guilty of in a court of law? And what has he been charged with?

 

[Voyager EMH]

Yes, they can still seize potential evidence from unrelated offences under S19 PACE, but the point is they can’t just go looking for anything. The focus of the search must still be the offence for which the detainee is in custody for, or like offences.

The analogy I always used when explaining search powers to young in service officers was that, if you have someone in custody for theft of a motor vehicle, and are searching for evidence of that or a like offence, then unless you are searching for documents relating to the offence or something similarly small, you shouldn’t really be looking in a drawer in a bedside table.

I imagine that looking for documented evidence of misconduct in public office would require a search of all drawers, cupboards or anywhere where pieces of paper could be stored.
Bedside tables included.
Where exactly would the officers doing this search be told not to look?

 

[Billysboots]

I imagine that looking for documented evidence of misconduct in public office would require a search of all drawers, cupboards or anywhere where pieces of paper could be stored.
Bedside tables included.
Where exactly would the officers doing this search be told not to look?

We’re splitting hairs. The search for an offence like this will, by its very nature, be extremely detailed. I just saw on the news that it has entered a second day.

My point was to correct you when you suggested that the police will be searching for “anything incriminating about anything”. To do that is an abuse of their powers. They will be searching for items related to the offence Andrew was arrested for, or like offences.

I think I know the point you were perhaps trying to make, which I have seen any number of others making elsewhere. That the police will use this as an opportunity to look for evidence relating to what Andrew may or may not have been involved with when it came to Epstein’s offending. It is of course entirely possible such evidence may be found, especially when electronic items are forensically examined. And it can then be seized and dealt with. But my point here is that this CANNOT be the focus of the searches as Andrew was not arrested for such matters.

The focus MUST be the offence for which he was arrested, or like offences. That is what the law clearly stipulates.

 

[irip]

Billy please excuse my ignorance.
If the police stumbled across something else which may indicate evidence of a different crime could they then follow this up?
If so (which I presume) they could how would they have to go about it?