Prince Andrew US civil sexual assault case

[XJ Flyer]

MikeO996 said:

Jerry Lee Lewis career was damaged by marrying his 13 year old cousin, but Elvis, who got together with Priscilla when she was 14 and he was 24, didn't do so bad. Could you imagine that happening today? He'd be disgraced and probably arrested.

But only because of the societal changes towards difference in age unless you're saying that every father of every under 18 mother in the US is sent to jail.

[youngsyr]

MarshPhantom said:

Dixy said:

Royalty are well payed by us the taxpayer. The taxpayer pays nothing to Royalty, the Crown contracted with the state over the income from the Crown estates.
Prince Andrew receives nothing from the state.

Does that make him being a Paedo OK? I'd also like to see where you got your figures from. Selling one of his houses would pay off a good chunk of the national debt.

Prince Andrew lived in Sunninghill Park until 2006 at which point it was sold for £15m.

The national debt is about £1.4 trillion, or 100,000 times the value of his house.

Buckingham Palace itself has been valued at about £1bn, so you'd need to sell 1,400 of them to cover the National debt!

[98elise]

NoNeed said:

911Gary said:

HoHoHo said:

He's now got your name and you're first in the queue for a room with a view in the tower matey

Of course he didn't do it. Apparently his lawyers asked him last night prior to releasing an official statement suggesting it's all bks - do you honestly think he'd lie to save any embarrassment to himself the royal family

Hmmm "Randy Andy" ring a bell?? Koo Stark Etc?? He was known to be "A bit of a boy" when younger.
Dont know why joking aside but hes always been my least favorite royal,perhaps because he married that hideous creature.

It does make you wonder why Harry is so popular.

A multi-millionaire playboy who flies apache gunships by day and does charity work by nights. He's the nearest thing we have to batman

Throw in the fact he's also royal prince and it must be a real hardship attracting women!

[MikeO996]

XJ Flyer said:

MikeO996 said:

Jerry Lee Lewis career was damaged by marrying his 13 year old cousin, but Elvis, who got together with Priscilla when she was 14 and he was 24, didn't do so bad. Could you imagine that happening today? He'd be disgraced and probably arrested.

But only because of the societal changes towards difference in age

Exactly, with some of the vitriol and hysteria expressed around these issues (e.g. earlier in the thread with talk of "paedos") it's important to remember that not so long ago this would have barely raised an eyebrow

[MarshPhantom]

youngsyr said:

MarshPhantom said:

Dixy said:

Royalty are well payed by us the taxpayer. The taxpayer pays nothing to Royalty, the Crown contracted with the state over the income from the Crown estates.
Prince Andrew receives nothing from the state.

Does that make him being a Paedo OK? I'd also like to see where you got your figures from. Selling one of his houses would pay off a good chunk of the national debt.

Prince Andrew lived in Sunninghill Park until 2006 at which point it was sold for £15m.

The national debt is about £1.4 trillion, or 100,000 times the value of his house.

Buckingham Palace itself has been valued at about £1bn, so you'd need to sell 1,400 of them to cover the National debt!

It's a start. We never get to hear how much royal protection costs every year. Selling all their property and the savings on maintainence would save a big chunk of change.

[XJ Flyer]

98elise said:

NoNeed said:

911Gary said:

HoHoHo said:

He's now got your name and you're first in the queue for a room with a view in the tower matey

Of course he didn't do it. Apparently his lawyers asked him last night prior to releasing an official statement suggesting it's all bks - do you honestly think he'd lie to save any embarrassment to himself the royal family

Hmmm "Randy Andy" ring a bell?? Koo Stark Etc?? He was known to be "A bit of a boy" when younger.
Dont know why joking aside but hes always been my least favorite royal,perhaps because he married that hideous creature.

It does make you wonder why Harry is so popular.

A multi-millionaire playboy who flies apache gunships by day and does charity work by nights. He's the nearest thing we have to batman

Throw in the fact he's also royal prince and it must be a real hardship attracting women!

The fact is none of that will make the slightest difference assuming he is looking for a much younger wife than himself in the face of current day prejudice concerning the age issue.

[youngsyr]

MarshPhantom said:

youngsyr said:

MarshPhantom said:

Dixy said:

Royalty are well payed by us the taxpayer. The taxpayer pays nothing to Royalty, the Crown contracted with the state over the income from the Crown estates.
Prince Andrew receives nothing from the state.

Does that make him being a Paedo OK? I'd also like to see where you got your figures from. Selling one of his houses would pay off a good chunk of the national debt.

Prince Andrew lived in Sunninghill Park until 2006 at which point it was sold for £15m.

The national debt is about £1.4 trillion, or 100,000 times the value of his house.

Buckingham Palace itself has been valued at about £1bn, so you'd need to sell 1,400 of them to cover the National debt!

It's a start. We never get to hear how much royal protection costs every year. Selling all their property and the savings on maintainence would save a big chunk of change.

Great, so we sell all their property and cover the interest on the national debt for a couple of weeks, then where do we entertain foreign heads of State? The local Harvester?!

Seriously, you need to either step away from the keyboard or take some maths lessons - the national debt is huge, the spending on the Royal Family is a drop in the ocean in comparison, without even considering the income they generate through tourism and goodwill to the UK.

[MarshPhantom]

youngsyr said:

MarshPhantom said:

youngsyr said:

MarshPhantom said:

Dixy said:

Royalty are well payed by us the taxpayer. The taxpayer pays nothing to Royalty, the Crown contracted with the state over the income from the Crown estates.
Prince Andrew receives nothing from the state.

Does that make him being a Paedo OK? I'd also like to see where you got your figures from. Selling one of his houses would pay off a good chunk of the national debt.

Prince Andrew lived in Sunninghill Park until 2006 at which point it was sold for £15m.

The national debt is about £1.4 trillion, or 100,000 times the value of his house.

Buckingham Palace itself has been valued at about £1bn, so you'd need to sell 1,400 of them to cover the National debt!

It's a start. We never get to hear how much royal protection costs every year. Selling all their property and the savings on maintainence would save a big chunk of change.

Great, so we sell all their property and cover the interest on the national debt for a couple of weeks, then where do we entertain foreign heads of State? The local Harvester?!

Seriously, you need to either step away from the keyboard or take some maths lessons - the national debt is huge, the spending on the Royal Family is a drop in the ocean in comparison, without even considering the income they generate through tourism and goodwill to the UK.

Paedo prince possibly bad for goodwill/tourism - so should we bin them?

[Oakey]

MarshPhantom said:

Paedo prince possibly bad for goodwill/tourism - so should we bin them?

Come on, show us on the doll where Prince Andrew touched you.

[jeff m2]

If they arrested and jailed everyone who had sex before becoming 18 the country would grind to a halt.

There appear to be a lot of, "I was screwed by someone famous who has a lot of money" recently.

I'm waiting for the ads on TV from Lawyers offering no payment representation for getting laid.

[Moonhawk]

xjsdriver said:

Moonhawk said:

xjsdriver said:

On that note, Price Philip was sending love letters to Betty when she was only 13 and he was 18, or 19. What sort of 18 or 19 year old these days would get away with that? I believe it would be reported to the cops as grooming if it were anyone else. I guess it runs in the family.

I wouldn't be so quick to pull out the "it runs in the family" card. It wasn't too long ago that the attitudes towards large age gap marriages was very different to today and the age of consent and marriage in this country was much lower than it is now - it's likely that many of us have family members in living memory who started relationships at ages that would at the very least raise eyebrows in these enlightened times.

......maybe in your family, certainly not in mine.

You know 100% that nobody in your family had sex with or married when younger than 16 (or with somebody younger than 16) - even though it will have been perfectly legal at the time. You must be one hell of genealogy expert, I wish my family tree was as accurate as yours.

Just for reference:

• The age of consent for unmarried people in the England/UK between 1275 and 1875 was 12. It was raised to 13 in 1875 and raised again to 16 in 1885.

• The age of consent for married people was the same as the marriageable age which up until 1929 was 12 for girls and 14 for boys.

[MarshPhantom]

jeff m2 said:

If they arrested and jailed everyone who had sex before becoming 18 the country would grind to a halt.

There appear to be a lot of, "I was screwed by someone famous who has a lot of money" recently.

I'm waiting for the ads on TV from Lawyers offering no payment representation for getting laid.

I never screwed underage girls at orgies arranged by my convicted paedophile friend.

Would you pretend to have been raped for money?

[xjsdriver]

NoNeed said:

911Gary said:

HoHoHo said:

He's now got your name and you're first in the queue for a room with a view in the tower matey

Of course he didn't do it. Apparently his lawyers asked him last night prior to releasing an official statement suggesting it's all bks - do you honestly think he'd lie to save any embarrassment to himself the royal family

Hmmm "Randy Andy" ring a bell?? Koo Stark Etc?? He was known to be "A bit of a boy" when younger.
Dont know why joking aside but hes always been my least favorite royal,perhaps because he married that hideous creature.

It does make you wonder why Harry is so popular.

Have you noticed the remarkable similarity between Harry and Major James Hewitt (Retd.) ......he must lack that genetic material from Philip's line

[MarshPhantom]

Oakey said:

MarshPhantom said:

Paedo prince possibly bad for goodwill/tourism - so should we bin them?

Come on, show us on the doll where Prince Andrew touched you.

Why are you so cool with all this?

[Oakey]

MarshPhantom said:

I never screwed underage girls at orgies arranged by my convicted paedophile friend.

That sounds like a denial to me

[HoHoHo]

xjsdriver said:

NoNeed said:

911Gary said:

HoHoHo said:

He's now got your name and you're first in the queue for a room with a view in the tower matey

Of course he didn't do it. Apparently his lawyers asked him last night prior to releasing an official statement suggesting it's all bks - do you honestly think he'd lie to save any embarrassment to himself the royal family

Hmmm "Randy Andy" ring a bell?? Koo Stark Etc?? He was known to be "A bit of a boy" when younger.
Dont know why joking aside but hes always been my least favorite royal,perhaps because he married that hideous creature.

It does make you wonder why Harry is so popular.

Have you noticed the remarkable similarity between Harry and Major James Hewitt (Retd.) ......he must lack that genetic material from Philip's line

You are taking the piss?

[xjsdriver]

Moonhawk said:

You know 100% that nobody in your family had sex with or married when younger than 16 (or with somebody younger than 16) - even though it will have been perfectly legal at the time. You must be one hell of genealogy expert, I wish my family tree was as accurate as yours.

Just for reference:

• The age of consent for unmarried people in the England/UK between 1275 and 1875 was 12. It was raised to 13 in 1875 and raised again to 16 in 1885.

• The age of consent for married people was the same as the marriageable age which up until 1929 was 12 for girls and 14 for boys.

Stop trying to defend the indefensible - we're not talking about 1275 here, but 21st century Britain, where Dodgy Epstein has already pleaded guilty to tampering with kids (however close to adulthood they may have been - they we're NOT and we have a line in the sand which he chose to cross). If Andy's been fking kids who happen to be underage - then he should go to jail - end of!!!

[xjsdriver]

HoHoHo said:

xjsdriver said:

NoNeed said:

911Gary said:

HoHoHo said:

He's now got your name and you're first in the queue for a room with a view in the tower matey

Of course he didn't do it. Apparently his lawyers asked him last night prior to releasing an official statement suggesting it's all bks - do you honestly think he'd lie to save any embarrassment to himself the royal family

Hmmm "Randy Andy" ring a bell?? Koo Stark Etc?? He was known to be "A bit of a boy" when younger.
Dont know why joking aside but hes always been my least favorite royal,perhaps because he married that hideous creature.

It does make you wonder why Harry is so popular.

Have you noticed the remarkable similarity between Harry and Major James Hewitt (Retd.) ......he must lack that genetic material from Philip's line

You are taking the piss?

Make your own mind up - I'd say he looks more like Major Hewitt than his "dad"........

[HoHoHo]

A

xjsdriver said:

Make your own mind up - I'd say he looks more like Major Hewitt than his "dad"........

So ignoring my post earlier

HoHoHo said:

A) He's not really a member of the royal family
B) He's got a huge todger
C) He's not really a member of the royal family

Answers on a postcard please.

Please keep up at the back

[Oakey]

MarshPhantom said:

Why are you so cool with all this?

Because if it happened exactly as the woman in particular claimed it did, in the places she said it did, then it's hard to get outraged someone had sex with someone of the legal consensual age. It isn't illegal to have sex with a 17 year old in London or New York and she was 18 when they allegedly met in the Caribbean. None of that would make him a paedophile, despite your best efforts to insist he is.

The other guy, however, is a completely different matter. He's been having sex with girls far younger than 17 where it's most definitely illegal.

Now, if someone else comes out to say Prince Andrew nonced them when they were 13 or whatever you'll have a point but until then you're just looking stupid.