NonceUponATimeInEpsteinAndAndyLand

The Firestarter said:
Are you sure its diplomatic immunity he enjoys? That's only reserved for actual foreign government diplomats.
Click to expand...

You are probably right. I recall reading that the royals are afforded immunity and probably associated diplomatic with that.
I should have checked my facts first.
 
Isn't there a specific description for paedophilia that means messing with a 14 year-old girl wouldn't be considered paedophilia?

Obviously it's minging and illegal that he's done it, but it may not be noncing.
 
Grinner said:
Isn't there a specific description for paedophilia that means messing with a 14 year-old girl wouldn't be considered paedophilia?

Obviously it's minging and illegal that he's done it, but it may not be noncing.
Click to expand...
As Pogue pointed out a while back, it's ephebophilia. As you said, it's still minging but there is a distinction between children and mid-teens.
 
Grinner said:
So the upper-class cow above was actually correct then? Funny how Piers Moron got 'noncense' in there though.
Click to expand...

Correct on a technicality, I suppose you can say? Still, an absolute vile attitude. Good on Morgan.
 
Grinner said:
So the upper-class cow above was actually correct then? Funny how Piers Moron got 'noncense' in there though.
Click to expand...
Yeah, she was factually correct but that's never stopped Morgan from shouting loudest to win an argument. On this occasion it just happened to be against a pretty repugnant old crone, so it's fine. Bit like enjoying City beating Liverpool.
 
Grinner said:
Isn't there a specific description for paedophilia that means messing with a 14 year-old girl wouldn't be considered paedophilia?

Obviously it's minging and illegal that he's done it, but it may not be noncing.
Click to expand...

You're correct. Paedophilia has become a kind of catch-all term for the sexual abuse of young people, but the term itself refers specifically to the ongoing sexual attraction to pre-pubescent children. The best known example is probably the labelling of all catholic priests accused of sexual abuse as paedophiles, when the vast majority weren't actually paedophiles; they were ephebophiles. As I understand it the latter involves, or has a link with, a homosexual attraction to adolescents. It's a highly contentious talking point therefore in regards to said example.
 
Last edited:
Buster15 said:
Some time ago I was at an RAF station in Scotland on behalf of the jet engine supplier.
The Prince was visiting the station and I was there to answer any questions he might have about the aircraft's jet engines.
He was being shown around by a large group of officers and he came up to the engines I was to covering. He walked around for a few minutes pretending to know what he looking at. Then then asked a question.
I started to answer him and he said 'not you, the officers' and ignore me completely.
After he moved on, one of the officers came up to me and apologised.
Nice chap...
Click to expand...
An entitled twat and its funny watching the media go after him because in terms of the royals he's a soft target.
 
Nothing to see here people. He just slipped and landed on his neck.
 
Prince Andrew: KPMG ends sponsorship of royal's scheme
KPMG has not renewed its sponsorship of the Duke of York's entrepreneurship initiative, Pitch@Palace.
The accountancy firm is thought to have made the decision at the end of October.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-50467019
 
Grinner said:
So the upper-class cow above was actually correct then? Funny how Piers Moron got 'noncense' in there though.
Click to expand...

Bear in mind that was just one of the ways those corrupt bastards got him a light sentence. They labeled those manipulated kids as ‘prostitutes’ so the offenses didn’t seem as bad. It was total horseshit, and we shouldn’t help them spread that crap.
 
Kentonio said:
Bear in mind that was just one of the ways those corrupt bastards got him a light sentence. They labeled those manipulated kids as ‘prostitutes’ so the offenses didn’t seem as bad. It was total horseshit, and we shouldn’t help them spread that crap.
Click to expand...


Randy Andy is said to have only been with a 17 year-old though, right? IMO it's scuzzy from him but in the UK that is legal. If he's broken US laws then he should be nicked but we know it's not going to happen.
 
Grinner said:
Randy Andy is said to have only been with a 17 year-old though, right? IMO it's scuzzy from him but in the UK that is legal. If he's broken US laws then he should be nicked but we know it's not going to happen.
Click to expand...

It was rape though wasn’t it? I mean she wasn’t a willing participant in any of this so UK laws or not what he did wasn’t just questionable it was illegal and sick.
 
Pexbo said:
It was rape though wasn’t it? I mean she wasn’t a willing participant in any of this so UK laws or not what he did wasn’t just questionable it was illegal and sick.
Click to expand...

Honestly I'm not sure about the details of the allegations. If that's true then of course he should be done,
 
sammsky1 said:
Prince Andrew: KPMG ends sponsorship of royal's scheme
KPMG has not renewed its sponsorship of the Duke of York's entrepreneurship initiative, Pitch@Palace.
The accountancy firm is thought to have made the decision at the end of October.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-50467019
Click to expand...
What a load of bs. Decision made late October, Epstein a factor but this all comes out after the vid.
 
I find it extremely hard to believe that Maxwell has vanished without trace, particularly as the press are habitually voracious and determined whenever there's the chance of a scoop.
Ghislaine Maxwell is at the center of the Epstein controversy, but she's in hiding

Maxwell’s fate remains an almost complete mystery. She has not been charged. And while she presently faces civil litigation, the likelihood of a court appearance is unknown. Her last public appearance seems to have been at a Los Angeles fast-food restaurant in August, though doubts have been raised about the veracity of that sighting.

Multiple attorneys listed for Maxwell did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Federal authorities have said the investigation into Epstein’s sex trafficking is ongoing. But, officially, their comment is general and does not relate specifically to Maxwell or anyone else.
Click to expand...
 
SteveJ said:
I find it extremely hard to believe that Maxwell has vanished without trace, particularly as the press are habitually voracious and determined whenever there's the chance of a scoop.
Click to expand...
It's very strange. The CIA should be after her no (assuming she's left the country)? Plus the very best journalists there are. Yet nothing?
 
Pexbo said:
It was rape though wasn’t it? I mean she wasn’t a willing participant in any of this so UK laws or not what he did wasn’t just questionable it was illegal and sick.
Click to expand...

Im not sure the allegation goes as far as rape. At least I dont believe thats what she is claiming. She is claiming sexual impropriety in that she was paid to have sex with him.
 
Wouldn't normally comment on stuff like this but the international break really has left me high and dry. Instead of talking Achilles injuries I ended up watching what may turn out to be Prince Andrew's Achilles heel.

In fairness to Maitlis she didn't hold back and she did press him on some really sordid stuff. You could call it a High(ness) press. His defence was weak and she was playing between the lines for the whole match. Right from the whistle he avoided tackling her quick runs and tried to move her out onto the wings with claims that he didn't really know Epstein and was a plus one. He insisted he really wasn't a close friend at all and only knew him through an old University friend called Maxwell. (I think she may have been linked with Oxford Utd at one point)

The Princes defence looked really shaky throughout and he finally conceded an own goal when he slipped up on a question about why he had put in an appearance in Central Park for the opposition. She had photographic evidence of his appearance, albeit a little pedestrian, depicting close contact with the convicted paedophile. He couldn't deny the charge and had to think on his feet. He appealed the charge by insisting he had to end the friendship with Epstein face to face because it was the honourable thing to do. It was a real tussle but the crowd surely realised he had denied the close relationship right at the start of the match. Why would he feel compelled to end a "plus one relationship" with a face to face meeting? A meeting that eventually lasted 4 days. For me the extra time argument didn't stack up and he may have been better pursuing an alibi involving his first wife. He could have said he was with her and we all know Fergie time never fails.

In the end it was a bit of a mismatch and he came out looking second best. I suspect relegation looms.
 
Rooney24 said:
Im not sure the allegation goes as far as rape. At least I dont believe thats what she is claiming. She is claiming sexual impropriety in that she was paid to have sex with him.
Click to expand...

They were kids, mostly from underprivileged backgrounds. They were trafficked by Epstein and abused him and his associates. Whether they received compensation or not is absolutely immaterial to the argument. Labelling it as prostitution was the approach Epstein’s defence and enablers used to mitigate the horrors of what they did. “Oh they’re just prostitutes”. Well they weren’t before they met him and they certainly didn’t solicit it.

Did these children have sex willingly with these creeps? Of course they didn’t. Do you think these men knew that? Of course they did. It’s the definition of rape.
 
Pexbo said:
They were kids, mostly from underprivileged backgrounds. They were trafficked by Epstein and abused him and his associates. Whether they received compensation or not is absolutely immaterial to the argument. Labelling it as prostitution was the approach Epstein’s defence and enablers used to mitigate the horrors of what they did. “Oh they’re just prostitutes”. Well they weren’t before they met him and they certainly didn’t solicit it.

Did these children have sex willingly with these creeps? Of course they didn’t. Do you think these men knew that? Of course they did. It’s the definition of rape.
Click to expand...

I agree with you.

But I dont think she herself has gone as far as saying she was raped is what I am saying.
 
VorZakone said:
New party photos have come out. And he seems to look sweaty...
Click to expand...

His story is nonsense and the sweating thing has been debunked by doctors already. His insidious defence was created to make him look like a war hero when in fact its a proven lie that the condition he talks of doesn't exist and adrenalin has nothing to do with sweating. I can't believe he didn't check this.

He's a fool. The interview was joke and how this hasn't blown up bigger already is puzzling.

His very first words in the interview were to explain Epstein wasn't a close friend and he only knew him through a University friend. It's nonsense. The bloke flew all the way to NY to do the "Honourable thing" and finish the friendship face to face. Why would he do this if he only knew the bloke through a University friend. It obviously doesn't stack up. He's lying and has been seen to be lying. He needs to withdraw from all Royal duties immediately and go to the US and give his version of events and help with the enquiry. If he doesn't do this he will never be accepted by the public and will tarnish the Monarchy.

Fess up time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.