Quizzes & Puzzles41 mins ago
Has H R H Got A Get Out Of Jail Free Card
187 Answers
https:/
I wonder if he has rediscovered the ability to sweat ?
No doubt he is !
I wonder if he has rediscovered the ability to sweat ?
No doubt he is !
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Stickybottle. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
//Andrew has already lost this case, and Giuffre has won, if the majority of people end up thinking he raped her and avoided being sued based on an agreement drawn up between a sex offender and his victim. //
I agree, ellipsis. Something that was meant to protect Epstein's friends could well end up condemning them and leaving them with no opportunity to clear their names.
I agree, ellipsis. Something that was meant to protect Epstein's friends could well end up condemning them and leaving them with no opportunity to clear their names.
naomi - // //Andrew has already lost this case, and Giuffre has won, if the majority of people end up thinking he raped her and avoided being sued based on an agreement drawn up between a sex offender and his victim. //
I agree, ellipsis. Something that was meant to protect Epstein's friends could well end up condemning them and leaving them with no opportunity to clear their names. //
I heard another lawyer on the radio today, came in late, so I'm not sure if she represents Ms Giuffre or not -
She agreed with the lawyer whose view I posted yesterday - that the Agreement may not be seen as binding by the judge today.
And she also pointed out that Ms Giuffre also has the option to pursue Prince Andrew through the UK judicial system since she alleges that he abused her at an address in London.
That does assume that the Agreement will stand up today, and again on appeal, which is by no means certain.
What is assured though, is that Prince Andrew does not emerge from this well at all.
Having comprehensively destroyed whatever goodwill he may have built up over decades of tolerated boorish and arrogant behaviour, through his willingness to accept the yards of rope handed to him by Emily Maitlis, and then kindly save her the tedious bother of hanging him with it, buy doing so himself -
He has spent the remaining time hiding and avoiding any sort of responsibility for the situation in which he finds himself, allowing his lawyers to place any and all diversions and chicanery to avoid him facing up to that of which he is accused.
He could have simply asked her to put up or shut up, and gone to defend himself.
Then, even if he had lost, he could at least retain the dignity of facing up to his behaviour and accepting the consequences.
Instead, he has made it look as though he will do anything and everything his money and status allow, to avoid the consequences of his appalling choices in friends.
People moan that the rich and famous routinely use that money and fame to try and avoid the responsibilities in law that fall on the rest of us.
What a shame that a son of the monarch is so very keen to prove to the world at large, that such a perception is one hundred per cent accurate.
I agree, ellipsis. Something that was meant to protect Epstein's friends could well end up condemning them and leaving them with no opportunity to clear their names. //
I heard another lawyer on the radio today, came in late, so I'm not sure if she represents Ms Giuffre or not -
She agreed with the lawyer whose view I posted yesterday - that the Agreement may not be seen as binding by the judge today.
And she also pointed out that Ms Giuffre also has the option to pursue Prince Andrew through the UK judicial system since she alleges that he abused her at an address in London.
That does assume that the Agreement will stand up today, and again on appeal, which is by no means certain.
What is assured though, is that Prince Andrew does not emerge from this well at all.
Having comprehensively destroyed whatever goodwill he may have built up over decades of tolerated boorish and arrogant behaviour, through his willingness to accept the yards of rope handed to him by Emily Maitlis, and then kindly save her the tedious bother of hanging him with it, buy doing so himself -
He has spent the remaining time hiding and avoiding any sort of responsibility for the situation in which he finds himself, allowing his lawyers to place any and all diversions and chicanery to avoid him facing up to that of which he is accused.
He could have simply asked her to put up or shut up, and gone to defend himself.
Then, even if he had lost, he could at least retain the dignity of facing up to his behaviour and accepting the consequences.
Instead, he has made it look as though he will do anything and everything his money and status allow, to avoid the consequences of his appalling choices in friends.
People moan that the rich and famous routinely use that money and fame to try and avoid the responsibilities in law that fall on the rest of us.
What a shame that a son of the monarch is so very keen to prove to the world at large, that such a perception is one hundred per cent accurate.
naomi - // Something that was meant to protect Epstein's friends could well end up condemning them and leaving them with no opportunity to clear their names. //
Not so.
Any and all individuals who feel that their names and reputations are damaged by their association with Epsetin's grubby hole-in-the-wall pay-off to his victim are perfectly at liberty to do as she has done - sue in the civil courts and present their case there.
After all, if they are not guilty of any wrongdoing, why would they not wish to clear their names publicly for all to see?
Not so.
Any and all individuals who feel that their names and reputations are damaged by their association with Epsetin's grubby hole-in-the-wall pay-off to his victim are perfectly at liberty to do as she has done - sue in the civil courts and present their case there.
After all, if they are not guilty of any wrongdoing, why would they not wish to clear their names publicly for all to see?
bednobs - // it's much more difficult to "clear your name" in the civil courts than criminal //
Quite possibly - but if that is so, all the more reason for PA to have come out on the offensive, and got his defence in first, instead of hard-to-believe denials of meeting someone he has been photographed with.
Quite possibly - but if that is so, all the more reason for PA to have come out on the offensive, and got his defence in first, instead of hard-to-believe denials of meeting someone he has been photographed with.
oh my god
guff alert !
a page just of guff
psst ya wanna know what happend in court to day?
https:/
is not bad - the correspondent rather opines ( =says, you proles) that the aggressive questioning of the judge means he wont dismiss the case and Giuffre will have her day in court....
he ( the judge silly ) has reserved judgement ( gone away and thought about it sill) and will let us all know
I can hardly wait !
[Meanwhile - the Andy ( the great Andy Hughes silly ) and Naomi spat ( Naomi, my queen of - er something) - has moved on from
" Last week you said I had a big nose!" " I did not - so!" onto.....
" Seven days ago, you inferred I had an enlarged proboscis." " I deny any mention of anything large on you - sic!" - the war rages......]
guff alert !
a page just of guff
psst ya wanna know what happend in court to day?
https:/
is not bad - the correspondent rather opines ( =says, you proles) that the aggressive questioning of the judge means he wont dismiss the case and Giuffre will have her day in court....
he ( the judge silly ) has reserved judgement ( gone away and thought about it sill) and will let us all know
I can hardly wait !
[Meanwhile - the Andy ( the great Andy Hughes silly ) and Naomi spat ( Naomi, my queen of - er something) - has moved on from
" Last week you said I had a big nose!" " I did not - so!" onto.....
" Seven days ago, you inferred I had an enlarged proboscis." " I deny any mention of anything large on you - sic!" - the war rages......]
// She agreed with the lawyer whose view I posted yesterday - that the Agreement may not be seen as binding by the judge today.//
yeah the one yesterday was an ex Fed prosecutor ( criminal only I think - he would be against a no-prosecution agreement unless he concluded it himself ). He ( the fed silly) concluded with - " dunno really: see what the judges says" and to day - it was a NY board lawyer who had sued for various groups and she said it was too wide as far as she was concerned - but mentioned no cases. She also said it was surprising that a trained lawyer had expressed it thus without thinking whether it wd stand up
yeah the one yesterday was an ex Fed prosecutor ( criminal only I think - he would be against a no-prosecution agreement unless he concluded it himself ). He ( the fed silly) concluded with - " dunno really: see what the judges says" and to day - it was a NY board lawyer who had sued for various groups and she said it was too wide as far as she was concerned - but mentioned no cases. She also said it was surprising that a trained lawyer had expressed it thus without thinking whether it wd stand up
can we keep to the point please naomi: None of the American laywers have cited cases where the exclusion clause was deemed to wide.
Perhaps it is not worth case-law
I was gonna apologise for posting on the subject - Giuffre and whether she is a wronged woman or a treasure hunter - but now I wont!
(this statement was made in the spirit of the case of stating and signing a document one day and then saying ( averring that is!) that that is NOT what you meant at all!) - watch this space !
Perhaps it is not worth case-law
I was gonna apologise for posting on the subject - Giuffre and whether she is a wronged woman or a treasure hunter - but now I wont!
(this statement was made in the spirit of the case of stating and signing a document one day and then saying ( averring that is!) that that is NOT what you meant at all!) - watch this space !
Ellipsis - // The lady on the radio today expressed it well. Something like "In the United States, the currency of justice is the dollar." In other words, if somebody has wronged you, they pay you, in cash. Therefore, justice-seeking and money-seeking is the same thing. //
I heard that too.
She pointed out the cultural differences between the UK and the US, whereby in the UK, seeking financial damages is seen as money-grubbing - as witnessed by a number of posts on this site on the subject - whereas in the US, it is absolutely seen as the standard mark of justice served.
I heard that too.
She pointed out the cultural differences between the UK and the US, whereby in the UK, seeking financial damages is seen as money-grubbing - as witnessed by a number of posts on this site on the subject - whereas in the US, it is absolutely seen as the standard mark of justice served.
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles62 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles67 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles70 mins ago
Home & Garden135 mins ago
ChatterBank150 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.