Prince Andrew US civil sexual assault case

[scottydoesntknow]

[Chimune]

I just shazammed the end music...

[anonymous-user]

Great to see Prince Andrew just make matter worse.

But he will always be protected and it's disgusting.

[dangerousB]

tim0409 said:

Same here; I note he arches his foot when he is telling another lie. There is a excellent crime programme where they get body language/voice experts to analyse interview footage; they would have a field day with this.

"Jim can't swim" on YouTube/Patreon? Excellent channel.

[Unsorted]

Sure he was trying to stifle a grin when asked about Epstein's death. Then he kind of half laughs about it.

As per previous posts, the interview did not go well for him and frankly he seemed a bit thick.

[Cold]

I've not really been following these shenanigans too closely, has there been any actual evidence of wrongdoing apart from an accusation, hearsay and the subsequent presumption that he's a wrongun'?

[Reciprocating mass]

JPJPJP said:

After seeing this, would you let your underage daughter anywhere near Prince Andrew?

Having known somebody who works in those circles I’d be more concerned about your underage son tbh

[Wacky Racer]

Should have got Jeremy Paxman to do the interview.

Then you would see sweat.

[anonymous-user]

Emily Maitlis is better than Jeremy Paxman. She uses a rapier or poignard. Cross examination does not mean examining crossly.

[Wacky Racer]

Breadvan72 said:

Emily Maitlis is better than Jeremy Paxman. She uses a rapier or poignard. Cross examination does not mean examining crossly.

Well I think I'd rather be "interviewed" by the Gestapo than Paxman.

[anonymous-user]

Cold said:

I've not really been following these shenanigans too closely, has there been any actual evidence of wrongdoing apart from an accusation, hearsay and the subsequent presumption that he's a wrongun'?

An accusation is often (not always) based on evidence. There has not yet been a decision by any judge or jury. In criminal law terms, Andrew Windsor is to be presumed innocent. That does not mean that there is no evidence against him. In civil law terms, the allegation will be decided on the balance of probabilities. Can we be sure that the guy committed the misconduct suggested? No. Does it appear possible that he did so? Yes. Does it appear probable? It may be too early to say. He did not present in the interview as a man who is the victim of unjust allegations, but let's wait and see.

[anonymous-user]

Wacky Racer said:

Breadvan72 said:

Emily Maitlis is better than Jeremy Paxman. She uses a rapier or poignard. Cross examination does not mean examining crossly.

Well I think I'd rather be "interviewed" by the Gestapo than Paxman.

Paxman was good in his day, but I think became a bit too sneery and shouty later on. Having spent over thirty years watching and doing cross examinations - good, bad, and indifferent; I reckon that the Maitlis cross-examination was right up there at Expert level.

[scottydoesntknow]

Breadvan72 said:

I reckon that the Maitlis cross-examination was right up there at Expert level.

Paxman would have strung him up. Maitlis switched off the CCTV and turned a blind eye for half an hour.

[abzmike]

Just watched it on catch up. Aside from his lack of explanation for being in the most incriminating photo, his explanation for visiting Epstein in New York is ludicrous. Why did he need to visit a convicted sex offender personally, when ignoring him, phoning him, sending a letter, texting or sending an email would have sufficed? Apparently there were loads of people milling around Epstein’s residences - wouldn’t HRH’s security detail been curious what they were up to? It didn’t add up before, and this car crash interview will not have helped his situation.

We have never heard a member of The Firm being questioned like this, and most likely never will again.

[anonymous-user]

scottydoesntknow said:

Breadvan72 said:

I reckon that the Maitlis cross-examination was right up there at Expert level.

Paxman would have strung him up. Maitlis switched off the CCTV and turned a blind eye for half an hour.

I suggest that you watch the interview again. I suggest that you are mistaken.

[scottydoesntknow]

Breadvan72 said:

I suggest that you watch the interview again. You are mistaken.

Perhaps I’m mistaken. What I meant was I thought her skilful technique allowed him to tie his own knot.

[anonymous-user]

In that case we agree.

[anonymous-user]

magooagain said:

Would have been better if he was interviewed by a decent interviewer. Soft questions and he still looks guilty.

The questions were hard ones wrapped in velvet so as to appear soft. The best sort of questions for this purpose. Maitlis skewered the guy.

[eskidavies]

eskidavies said:

Wonder if some ex sas guy is gonna be tasked with an off the books job ,firm etc your on your own ,I’ve read too many books

I’d be stting myself if I was him ,I wouldn’t drive my car in case the steering arm falls off at speed or a oh fk I don’t know ,(insert covert accidents)

[The Mad Monk]

Unsorted said:

Sure he was trying to stifle a grin when asked about Epstein's death. Then he kind of half laughs about it.

As per previous posts, the interview did not go well for him and frankly he seemed a bit thick.

"frankly he seemed a bit thick"

It should be remembered that he has his position simply through an accident of birth. Nothing more complicated than that.

We are incredibly lucky that nothing worse happens.