And wears black socks with shorts.
The prince and the sex offender
- Thread starter Farneyman
- Start date
D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
He hasn’t been charged with anything - the law courts haven’t charged him , the police haven’t charged him - this is a civil case being brought forward by one single lady and it’s looking like to be a case of her word against his.
Right now he is guilty by association by the media and one single photo
If he changes his shoes in the car park then hang the bugger
Leftitshort
Well-known member
He’s had a chance to put his side of the story. It went terribly in a pre prepared interview. ? anyone
the use of the Epstein gagging order defence is shameful. Even his own family don’t believe him, hence no longer an HRH
drdel
Tour Rookie
Just suppose he is innocent and has no recollection of the person why should he need to prove anything?
Leftitshort
Well-known member
Yes just suppose, he can’t remember the person but can remember where he was when he couldn’t remember the person. Very specific about what he could recall
Foxholer
Blackballed
Trial by tabloid. Certainly sells newspapers!
And give ammo to 'Royaly Haters'.
Leftitshort
Well-known member
There will be no trial by jury. The civil case though. The burden of proof is less. OJ got off on a criminal trial, found culpable in a civil trial. He was hard done by also ?
Foxholer
Blackballed
As far as I know, US Civil cases can be 'by Jury'. Agree re burden of proof though.
Btw. My 'trial by tabloid' was unrelated to the actual court case. And hopefully it will not influence potential jurors.
Last edited:
srixon 1
Journeyman Pro
I was on the same Lynx squadron as him at Portland in the 80’s. A few of the older guys that had also worked with Charlie in previous years said their personalities were like chalk and cheese. Not hard to guess which one they thought was the friendliest.
RichA
Well-known member
Did he not refuse to even be interviewed by the US investigating authorities? He certainly hasn't cooperated, other than giving his side to the media.
Bunkermagnet
Journeyman Pro
Many seem to be forgetting that although she may have been 17 when the "photo" was taken, she wouldn't have been illegal in this country (which is from where the photo being pushed about and is supposed to have been taken).
It may be distasteful, but not illegal.
Ethan
Money List Winner
The alleged incidents also happened in New York, and sex trafficking is also alleged. No charges are filed for any UK incidents. The picture is to refute the response that he never met her.
williamalex1
Money List Winner
I'm watching Jerry Lee Lewis on Sky Arts just now.
I seem to remember him marrying a 13 year old , way in the 60s.
I seem to remember him marrying a 13 year old , way in the 60s.
williamalex1
Money List Winner
Not to mention Elvis and Pricilla 
Fade and Die
Medal Winner
Not to mention Elvis and Pricilla
And Bill Wyman and Mandy Smith. She was 13!
williamalex1
Money List Winner
And Bill Wyman and Mandy Smith. QUOTE]
Well she was just 17 you know what I mean
williamalex1
Money List Winner
Not PC, but watching Benard Manning Ungagged on YouTube is cringingly funny.
rulefan
Tour Winner
I'm not on his side but why would he if there was no criminal charge involving him?
drdel
Tour Rookie
That is the issue. People are taking 'sides' based on media conjecture and/or anti-royal sentiments.
