Can't find a thread so I'll start this one.

If his complainant wants to void her settlement agreement with Epstein, if I were the Judge, I'd be staying her action until she returned the US half million.

Aussie wrote on Jan 5^th, 2022 at 7:27pm:

Can't find a thread so I'll start this one. If his complainant wants to void her settlement agreement with Epstein, if I were the Judge, I'd be staying her action until she returned the US half million.

I haven't read anything on Phillip Andrew,so I have no idea if the answer is out there or not but I'll ask anyway. Isn't her agreement with Epstein? Why then should Phillip Andrew be protected by it? he wasn't part of the settlement

John Smith wrote on Jan 5^th, 2022 at 7:31pm:

Aussie wrote on Jan 5th, 2022 at 7:27pm: Can't find a thread so I'll start this one. If his complainant wants to void her settlement agreement with Epstein, if I were the Judge, I'd be staying her action until she returned the US half million. I haven't read anything on Phillip,so tI have no idea if the answer is out there or not but I'll ask anyway. Isn't her agreement with Epstein? Why then should Phillip be protected by it? he wasn't part of the settlement

Phillip is dead you Nong!

It's Andrew that's in deep sh1t!

Lisa Jones wrote on Jan 5^th, 2022 at 8:04pm:

John Smith wrote on Jan 5th, 2022 at 7:31pm: Aussie wrote on Jan 5th, 2022 at 7:27pm: Can't find a thread so I'll start this one. If his complainant wants to void her settlement agreement with Epstein, if I were the Judge, I'd be staying her action until she returned the US half million. I haven't read anything on Phillip,so tI have no idea if the answer is out there or not but I'll ask anyway. Isn't her agreement with Epstein? Why then should Phillip be protected by it? he wasn't part of the settlement Phillip is dead you Nong! It's Andrew that's in deep sh1t!

my mistake .. Andrew.

John Smith wrote on Jan 5^th, 2022 at 7:31pm:

Aussie wrote on Jan 5th, 2022 at 7:27pm: Can't find a thread so I'll start this one. If his complainant wants to void her settlement agreement with Epstein, if I were the Judge, I'd be staying her action until she returned the US half million. I haven't read anything on Phillip Andrew,so I have no idea if the answer is out there or not but I'll ask anyway. Isn't her agreement with Epstein? Why then should Phillip Andrew be protected by it? he wasn't part of the settlement

No settlement or agreement should be protection against illegal activity.

John Smith wrote on Jan 5^th, 2022 at 8:21pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jan 5th, 2022 at 8:04pm: John Smith wrote on Jan 5th, 2022 at 7:31pm: Aussie wrote on Jan 5th, 2022 at 7:27pm: Can't find a thread so I'll start this one. If his complainant wants to void her settlement agreement with Epstein, if I were the Judge, I'd be staying her action until she returned the US half million. I haven't read anything on Phillip,so tI have no idea if the answer is out there or not but I'll ask anyway. Isn't her agreement with Epstein? Why then should Phillip be protected by it? he wasn't part of the settlement Phillip is dead you Nong! It's Andrew that's in deep sh1t! my mistake .. Andrew.

What makes you think any of them are any different. A 27 year old Charles was at Dianna's home when she was about 15.

Dnarever wrote on Jan 5^th, 2022 at 8:25pm:

John Smith wrote on Jan 5th, 2022 at 7:31pm: Aussie wrote on Jan 5th, 2022 at 7:27pm: Can't find a thread so I'll start this one. If his complainant wants to void her settlement agreement with Epstein, if I were the Judge, I'd be staying her action until she returned the US half million. I haven't read anything on Phillip Andrew,so I have no idea if the answer is out there or not but I'll ask anyway. Isn't her agreement with Epstein? Why then should Phillip Andrew be protected by it? he wasn't part of the settlement No settlement or agreement should be protection against illegal activity.

Agreed!

Dnarever wrote on Jan 5^th, 2022 at 8:28pm:

John Smith wrote on Jan 5th, 2022 at 8:21pm: Lisa Jones wrote on Jan 5th, 2022 at 8:04pm: John Smith wrote on Jan 5th, 2022 at 7:31pm: Aussie wrote on Jan 5th, 2022 at 7:27pm: Can't find a thread so I'll start this one. If his complainant wants to void her settlement agreement with Epstein, if I were the Judge, I'd be staying her action until she returned the US half million. I haven't read anything on Phillip,so tI have no idea if the answer is out there or not but I'll ask anyway. Isn't her agreement with Epstein? Why then should Phillip be protected by it? he wasn't part of the settlement Phillip is dead you Nong! It's Andrew that's in deep sh1t! my mistake .. Andrew. What makes you think any of them are any different. A 27 year old Charles was at Dianna's home when she was 15.

Who knows what really went on?

Diana is no longer around 🥺

I will say this : she deserved so much better than that old ugly philandering POS she married.

Dnarever wrote on Jan 5^th, 2022 at 8:28pm:

John Smith wrote on Jan 5th, 2022 at 8:21pm: Lisa Jones wrote on Jan 5th, 2022 at 8:04pm: John Smith wrote on Jan 5th, 2022 at 7:31pm: Aussie wrote on Jan 5th, 2022 at 7:27pm: Can't find a thread so I'll start this one. If his complainant wants to void her settlement agreement with Epstein, if I were the Judge, I'd be staying her action until she returned the US half million. I haven't read anything on Phillip,so tI have no idea if the answer is out there or not but I'll ask anyway. Isn't her agreement with Epstein? Why then should Phillip be protected by it? he wasn't part of the settlement Phillip is dead you Nong! It's Andrew that's in deep sh1t! my mistake .. Andrew. What makes you think any of them are any different. A 27 year old Charles was at Dianna's home when she was about 15.

I don't  ... but I've  gotta keep the asylums resident happy

Dnarever wrote on Jan 5^th, 2022 at 8:25pm:

John Smith wrote on Jan 5th, 2022 at 7:31pm: Aussie wrote on Jan 5th, 2022 at 7:27pm: Can't find a thread so I'll start this one. If his complainant wants to void her settlement agreement with Epstein, if I were the Judge, I'd be staying her action until she returned the US half million. I haven't read anything on Phillip Andrew,so I have no idea if the answer is out there or not but I'll ask anyway. Isn't her agreement with Epstein? Why then should Phillip Andrew be protected by it? he wasn't part of the settlement No settlement or agreement should be protection against illegal activity.

I might agree with that of this was a criminal prosecution.  It is a civil action and every day of the week in their thousands people sign up to Discharge/Indemnity agreements to settle and bring to an end civil actions.

Seems to be an "own goal" by Andrew's legal team ...

If he could be considered a party to the settlement ... doesn't that mean he was part of the activity?  :D

Captain Nemo wrote on Jan 6^th, 2022 at 10:21am:

Seems to be an "own goal" by Andrew's legal team ... If he could be considered a party to the settlement ... doesn't that mean he was part of the activity?  :D

No.  It estoppes her from bringing any action against any person she considers to have offended against her.

Aussie wrote on Jan 5^th, 2022 at 7:27pm:

Can't find a thread so I'll start this one. If his complainant wants to void her settlement agreement with Epstein, if I were the Judge, I'd be staying her action until she returned the US half million.

She spent all that money on a lavish lifestyle
and now she wants more.

She did it because she wanted more.

Prince Andrew - good friends of the Biden/Clinton/Obama/Democrat/Media/Epstein-Maxwell/BLM 'island crew'.

...the ones who need Trump to make them look better than they really are - so desperately.  ;D
But it ain't working - for the whole world to see.

Wikileaks ;)

Bobby. wrote on Jan 6^th, 2022 at 2:13pm:

Aussie wrote on Jan 5th, 2022 at 7:27pm: Can't find a thread so I'll start this one. If his complainant wants to void her settlement agreement with Epstein, if I were the Judge, I'd be staying her action until she returned the US half million. She spent all that money on a lavish lifestyle and now she wants more. She did it because she wanted more.

That seems to be the primary objective of most of these historical "abuse" cases these days.

There are many underage prostitutes in the US, they never sue anyone because they have no one to sue.
But these are the true victims, not these "wait for the best rewards" fence sitters.
Then there are the poor child brides of Islam, raped from an early age with many dying in childbirth, no calls of help for them.

I have no time for these "gold diggers".
That is the term that used to be used, now its "survivors"

Jasin wrote on Jan 6^th, 2022 at 7:05pm:

Prince Andrew - good friends of the Biden/Clinton/Obama/Democrat/Media/Epstein-Maxwell/BLM 'island crew'. ...the ones who need Trump to make them look better than they really are - so desperately.  ;D But it ain't working - for the whole world to see. Wikileaks ;)

LOL Trump....alleged child molester Trump?

Jim Lahey wrote on Jan 7^th, 2022 at 5:12pm:

Jasin wrote on Jan 6th, 2022 at 7:05pm: Prince Andrew - good friends of the Biden/Clinton/Obama/Democrat/Media/Epstein-Maxwell/BLM 'island crew'. ...the ones who need Trump to make them look better than they really are - so desperately.  ;D But it ain't working - for the whole world to see. Wikileaks ;) LOL Trump....alleged child molester Trump?

It's also alleged that he told the small child he allegedly raped that he would kill her and her family if she told anyone about the alleged attack.

This is the same "man" who is on record grooming a 10 year old girl in a shopping centre (or mall, for you Americans).

Jasin wrote on Jan 6^th, 2022 at 7:05pm:

Prince Andrew - good friends of the Biden/Clinton/Obama/Democrat/Media/Epstein-Maxwell/BLM 'island crew'. ...the ones who need Trump to make them look better than they really are - so desperately.  ;D But it ain't working - for the whole world to see. Wikileaks ;)

Quote:

Prince Andrew - good friends of the Biden/Clinton/Obama/Democrat/Media/Epstein-Maxwell/BLM 'island crew'

You seem to have left someone out ?

https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2020/12/13/22/36799428-0-image-a-26_1607898306025.jpg

https://media.tatler.com/photos/6141e976e00e3d8849bff27f/master/w_1600%2Cc_limit/gettyimages-1192977806-1.jpg

Groggy is in heaven.

He has his sock back and can now talk to himself and have some support for his ridiculious ideas.

Valkie wrote on Jan 7^th, 2022 at 7:28pm:

Groggy is in heaven. He has his sock back and can now talk to himself and have some support for his ridiculious ideas.

Anything useful to add Valkie? didn't think so :-*

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 7^th, 2022 at 6:27pm:

Jim Lahey wrote on Jan 7th, 2022 at 5:12pm: Jasin wrote on Jan 6th, 2022 at 7:05pm: Prince Andrew - good friends of the Biden/Clinton/Obama/Democrat/Media/Epstein-Maxwell/BLM 'island crew'. ...the ones who need Trump to make them look better than they really are - so desperately.  ;D But it ain't working - for the whole world to see. Wikileaks ;) LOL Trump....alleged child molester Trump? It's also alleged that he told the small child he allegedly raped that he would kill her and her family if she told anyone about the alleged attack. This is the same "man" who is on record grooming a 10 year old girl in a shopping centre (or mall, for you Americans).

What do YOU personally think about such a man Greggary? I'm curious.

Trump came into contact with the Sleazy Island Group (Prince Andrew, Epstein, Maxwell, Obamas, Clintons, Bidens and more) of the Media Elite.
But like Trump called the Media 'Fake Media' - everyone knows he 'officially' distanced himself from that Group just like he distanced himself from the Media.
It's a case of Peccary hanging out with Epstein, Prince Andrew and Bill Clinton and calling Trump a Paedo to try and hide his own corrupt ways. Aqua has called him out on this many times.

Trump is the 'honest' Bad Guy. Not afraid to put his cards on the table and call the Corrupt Political/Media Elite's bluff.
Of course, the Corrupt Political/Media Elite, try to fraud the public into believing they are not 'like Trump' and we all know what lengths they have gone to to hide their Corruption up their sleeve and delude the Public.

Trump forced their hand and now the World sees, that they only had a pair of low cards afterall.

Jasin wrote on Jan 7^th, 2022 at 11:30pm:

Trump came into contact with the Sleazy Island Group (Prince Andrew, Epstein, Maxwell, Obamas, Clintons, Bidens and more) of the Media Elite. But like Trump called the Media 'Fake Media' - everyone knows he 'officially' distanced himself from that Group just like he distanced himself from the Media. It's a case of Peccary hanging out with Epstein, Prince Andrew and Bill Clinton and calling Trump a Paedo to try and hide his own corrupt ways. Aqua has called him out on this many times. Trump is the 'honest' Bad Guy. Not afraid to put his cards on the table and call the Corrupt Political/Media Elite's bluff. Of course, the Corrupt Political/Media Elite, try to fraud the public into believing they are not 'like Trump' and we all know what lengths they have gone to to hide their Corruption up their sleeve and delude the Public. Trump forced their hand and now the World sees, that they only had a pair of low cards afterall.

Quote:

Prince Andrew and Bill Clinton and calling Trump  a Paedo to try and hide his own corrupt ways.

You forget or ignore the previous 15 plus years when Trump was close to Epstein and Maxwell.

I don't think either Prince A or Bill have called Trump anything. The allegation against Trump came from the 13 year old girl who accused him of rape and the witness who confirmed that it happened as shown in the court documents. Bill wasn't there.

Don't try to use Trump to make your filthy mob look 'less' guilty.
Your filthy mob got caught with your hands in the cookie jar.
Trump didn't.

Cry babies  :'(the lot of yas. ;D

Jasin wrote on Jan 8^th, 2022 at 12:48am:

Don't try to use Trump to make your filthy mob look 'less' guilty. Your filthy mob got caught with your hands in the cookie jar. Trump didn't. Cry babies  :'(the lot of yas. ;D

LOL fail bed pan man

Jasin wrote on Jan 8^th, 2022 at 12:48am:

Don't try to use Trump to make your filthy mob look 'less' guilty. Your filthy mob got caught with your hands in the cookie jar. Trump didn't. Cry babies  :'(the lot of yas. ;D

Most are saying that it should all be investigated and anyone guilty should get the penalty deserved.

It is you who want to exclude one person for political reasons.

Dnarever wrote on Jan 8^th, 2022 at 12:17am:

Jasin wrote on Jan 7th, 2022 at 11:30pm: Trump came into contact with the Sleazy Island Group (Prince Andrew, Epstein, Maxwell, Obamas, Clintons, Bidens and more) of the Media Elite. But like Trump called the Media 'Fake Media' - everyone knows he 'officially' distanced himself from that Group just like he distanced himself from the Media. It's a case of Peccary hanging out with Epstein, Prince Andrew and Bill Clinton and calling Trump a Paedo to try and hide his own corrupt ways. Aqua has called him out on this many times. Trump is the 'honest' Bad Guy. Not afraid to put his cards on the table and call the Corrupt Political/Media Elite's bluff. Of course, the Corrupt Political/Media Elite, try to fraud the public into believing they are not 'like Trump' and we all know what lengths they have gone to to hide their Corruption up their sleeve and delude the Public. Trump forced their hand and now the World sees, that they only had a pair of low cards afterall. Quote: Prince Andrew and Bill Clinton and calling Trump  a Paedo to try and hide his own corrupt ways. You forget or ignore the previous 15 plus years when Trump was close to Epstein and Maxwell. I don't think either Prince A or Bill have called Trump anything. The allegation against Trump came from the 13 year old girl who accused him of rape and the witness who confirmed that it happened as shown in the court documents. Bill wasn't there.

Rape is a serious criminal offence Trump was never charged  with anything in relation to that girl. If there was any evidence the police would have charged him.

All you assclowns are doing is throwing mud hoping it will stick perhaps you should ask why the police weren't interested in charging him.

Civil suits happen all the time in the US many hope to get a payment to settle it as they don't have the loser pays winners legal bills there. The cost of defending it in most cases is higher than offering a payout.

Dnarever wrote on Jan 8^th, 2022 at 12:17am:

Jasin wrote on Jan 7th, 2022 at 11:30pm: Trump came into contact with the Sleazy Island Group (Prince Andrew, Epstein, Maxwell, Obamas, Clintons, Bidens and more) of the Media Elite. But like Trump called the Media 'Fake Media' - everyone knows he 'officially' distanced himself from that Group just like he distanced himself from the Media. It's a case of Peccary hanging out with Epstein, Prince Andrew and Bill Clinton and calling Trump a Paedo to try and hide his own corrupt ways. Aqua has called him out on this many times. Trump is the 'honest' Bad Guy. Not afraid to put his cards on the table and call the Corrupt Political/Media Elite's bluff. Of course, the Corrupt Political/Media Elite, try to fraud the public into believing they are not 'like Trump' and we all know what lengths they have gone to to hide their Corruption up their sleeve and delude the Public. Trump forced their hand and now the World sees, that they only had a pair of low cards afterall. Quote: Prince Andrew and Bill Clinton and calling Trump  a Paedo to try and hide his own corrupt ways. You forget or ignore the previous 15 plus years when Trump was close to Epstein and Maxwell. I don't think either Prince A or Bill have called Trump anything. The allegation against Trump came from the 13 year old girl who accused him of rape and the witness who confirmed that it happened as shown in the court documents. Bill wasn't there.

Correct.

He also allegedly threatened to kill the girl if she told anyone about the alleged rape.

Moreover, it's further alleged that he threatened her with violence again if she showed up in court.

Peccary was seen hanging out partying with Epstein and Maxwell.
Peccary cries "But... but, Trump is much worse!" :'(

Jasin wrote on Jan 8^th, 2022 at 2:28pm:

Peccary was seen hanging out partying with Epstein and Maxwell. Peccary cries "But... but, Trump is much worse!" :'(

LOL so much fail from the bedpan man

I haven't been following this soapy but wasn't this woman a prostitute, randy Andy wouldn't be the first Royal to visit a pro.

Johnnie wrote on Jan 8^th, 2022 at 3:57pm:

I haven't been following this soapy but wasn't this woman a prostitute, randy Andy wouldn't be the first Royal to visit a pro.

Yes you haven't been following the story.

Dnarever wrote on Jan 8^th, 2022 at 6:43pm:

Johnnie wrote on Jan 8th, 2022 at 3:57pm: I haven't been following this soapy but wasn't this woman a prostitute, randy Andy wouldn't be the first Royal to visit a pro. Yes you haven't been following the story.

So much of British Royal boudoir history has been told in a number of tomes including <https://www.thedailybeast.com/oral-history-the-sex-lives-of-the-kings-and-queens-of-england>. However even here His Royal Highness’s escapade as a teenager in the change rooms of the Bondi Surf Life Saving club with three ‘members’ isn’t detailed. Won’t be unless relevant ASIO files ( if they still exist) are released.

Lisa Jones wrote on Jan 5^th, 2022 at 8:34pm:

Dnarever wrote on Jan 5th, 2022 at 8:28pm: John Smith wrote on Jan 5th, 2022 at 8:21pm: Lisa Jones wrote on Jan 5th, 2022 at 8:04pm: John Smith wrote on Jan 5th, 2022 at 7:31pm: Aussie wrote on Jan 5th, 2022 at 7:27pm: Can't find a thread so I'll start this one. If his complainant wants to void her settlement agreement with Epstein, if I were the Judge, I'd be staying her action until she returned the US half million. I haven't read anything on Phillip,so tI have no idea if the answer is out there or not but I'll ask anyway. Isn't her agreement with Epstein? Why then should Phillip be protected by it? he wasn't part of the settlement Phillip is dead you Nong! It's Andrew that's in deep sh1t! my mistake .. Andrew. What makes you think any of them are any different. A 27 year old Charles was at Dianna's home when she was 15. Who knows what really went on? Diana is no longer around 🥺 I will say this : she deserved so much better than that old ugly philandering POS she married.

You're thinking of her father in law. ;D

So, the Judge has allowed the case to proceed but I am not sure what he meant when he found that it was 'too soon' to decide if the Indemnity Agreement is enforceable.

Weird.

Aussie wrote on Jan 13^th, 2022 at 10:22am:

So, the Judge has allowed the case to proceed but I am not sure what he meant when he found that it was 'too soon' to decide if the Indemnity Agreement is enforceable. Weird.

It probably means nothing, he won't be in court and he didn't rape this gold digging prostitute but Andy is prepared to give up one of his Chateau's to finish this saga.

Something seems odd here. The woman making the allegations has already settled out of court, and by her own statement she was 17 at the time of the alleged sexual encounter.  While the sleaze factor of a middle aged man having sex with a 17 year old is undeniable, the age of consent is 16, so the woman was legally capable of giving informed consent.

What is the allegation actually about?

Belgarion wrote on Jan 13^th, 2022 at 9:14pm:

Something seems odd here. The woman making the allegations has already settled out of court, and by her own statement she was 17 at the time of the alleged sexual encounter.  While the sleaze factor of a middle aged man having sex with a 17 year old is undeniable, the age of consent is 16, so the woman was legally capable of giving informed consent. What is the allegation actually about?

I think it is because it is 18 in NY.  I don;t understand how this applies to an act in the UK.

However this is what I have read.

New York State's Child Victims Act was signed into law by Governor Andrew Cuomo in 2019.

It allowed survivors of childhood sexual abuse to file a case which had already been time-barred or expired, and gave them a year to do so.

That one-year window was then extended because of disruption to court services during the pandemic and ends this week, on 14 August.

Mr Cuomo called it a "pathway to justice" for people who allege they were abused when under-age and was intended to help "right wrongs that went unacknowledged and unpunished".

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-58153711

Aussie maybe able to provide insight into the logic here.

There's no need for Aussie to do that.

You simply needed to continue posting the rest of your article. It explained quite a number of issues quite clearly.


Ms Giuffre's legal action is a civil case filed by a private party for monetary damages, as opposed to a criminal case filed by the state.

Arick Fudali, a partner at New York legal firm Bloom, which has represented nine of Epstein's victims, told BBC Radio 4's Today programme that "very few" of such cases ended up going to trial but there was a "small chance" this could.

The alternatives are that it is settled beforehand, it is struck out by a judge, or the complainant ceases the action.

Melissa Murray, professor of law at New York University, said Prince Andrew "could be on the hook for significant money damages".

"This is not about whether or not Prince Andrew will go to jail - he has no criminal exposure from this particular case," she told the BBC.

Asked how likely it was that the case would to go to trial, she said Prince Andrew's team would probably be more worried that it comes at a "really unfortunate time", as Ms Maxwell is due to stand trial in November.

She has pleaded not guilty to federal charges that she conspired with Epstein in the abuse of four under-age girls.

Prof Murray said: "With this civil suit pending and her about to go to trial on these criminal charges, there may be even more pressure - and indeed temptation - for her to co-operate with federal prosecutors and perhaps provide more information about all of the individuals who were in the orbit of Jeffrey Epstein and that could, allegedly, include the prince himself."

Andrew's reputation is ruined no matter what happens.

Super Nova wrote on Jan 13^th, 2022 at 9:32pm:

Belgarion wrote on Jan 13th, 2022 at 9:14pm: Something seems odd here. The woman making the allegations has already settled out of court, and by her own statement she was 17 at the time of the alleged sexual encounter.  While the sleaze factor of a middle aged man having sex with a 17 year old is undeniable, the age of consent is 16, so the woman was legally capable of giving informed consent. What is the allegation actually about? I think it is because it is 18 in NY.  I don;t understand how this applies to an act in the UK. However this is what I have read. New York State's Child Victims Act was signed into law by Governor Andrew Cuomo in 2019. It allowed survivors of childhood sexual abuse to file a case which had already been time-barred or expired, and gave them a year to do so. That one-year window was then extended because of disruption to court services during the pandemic and ends this week, on 14 August. Mr Cuomo called it a "pathway to justice" for people who allege they were abused when under-age and was intended to help "right wrongs that went unacknowledged and unpunished". https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-58153711 Aussie maybe able to provide insight into the logic here.

That doesn't sound right or he would be up for a very serious crime, not for just being with a pro.

Belgarion wrote on Jan 13^th, 2022 at 9:14pm:

Something seems odd here. The woman making the allegations has already settled out of court, and by her own statement she was 17 at the time of the alleged sexual encounter.  While the sleaze factor of a middle aged man having sex with a 17 year old is undeniable, the age of consent is 16, so the woman was legally capable of giving informed consent. What is the allegation actually about?

The age of consent is 17 in New York and 18 in Florida.

They don't have the loser pays the winners legal fees in the US so civil suits are used to shake down wealthy people.

Many settle before going to court with offers from $20-50K it's cheaper than paying lawyers to defend it.

Super Nova wrote on Jan 13^th, 2022 at 9:49pm:

Andrew's reputation is ruined no matter what happens.

Exactly.

And by nexus ...the Royal Family's reputation is ruined too.

Which brings us to that Republic topic ...

Super Nova wrote on Jan 13^th, 2022 at 9:49pm:

Andrew's reputation is ruined no matter what happens.

yes, and so it should be.

Sprintcyclist wrote on Jan 13^th, 2022 at 10:01pm:

Super Nova wrote on Jan 13th, 2022 at 9:49pm: Andrew's reputation is ruined no matter what happens. yes, and so it should be.

Yep. Agreed.

https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/virginia-giuffre-allegedly-told-fellow-maxwell-victim-she-slept-with-prince-andrew/news-story/c62e96c1489ef4534538a17e24afd357

Baronvonrort wrote on Jan 13^th, 2022 at 9:55pm:

Belgarion wrote on Jan 13th, 2022 at 9:14pm: Something seems odd here. The woman making the allegations has already settled out of court, and by her own statement she was 17 at the time of the alleged sexual encounter.  While the sleaze factor of a middle aged man having sex with a 17 year old is undeniable, the age of consent is 16, so the woman was legally capable of giving informed consent. What is the allegation actually about? The age of consent is 17 in New York and 18 in Florida. They don't have the loser pays the winners legal fees in the US so civil suits are used to shake down wealthy people. Many settle before going to court with offers from $20-50K it's cheaper than paying lawyers to defend it.

Baron...it's far more involved than that.

Guess who's making a lot of serious money out of all this?

It won't be the victims.

https://www.ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/news/2021/08/11/-flood--of-new-suits-as-child-victims-act-look-back-window-set-to-close

Re age of consent issue :

"...the Child Victims Act of 2019. The law changed the statute of limitations for such crimes, raising to 55 from 23 the age by which a person must file a civil claim for sexual abuse they experienced younger than 18."

Lisa Jones wrote on Jan 13^th, 2022 at 10:08pm:

Sprintcyclist wrote on Jan 13th, 2022 at 10:01pm: Super Nova wrote on Jan 13th, 2022 at 9:49pm: Andrew's reputation is ruined no matter what happens. yes, and so it should be. Yep. Agreed. https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/virginia-giuffre-allegedly-told-fellow-maxwell-victim-she-slept-with-prince-andrew/news-story/c62e96c1489ef4534538a17e24afd357

From your link

Quote:

She said she recalled Ms Giuffre texting her from London in March 2001 to say that she was going out to dinner with Prince Andrew, Ms Maxwell and Mr Epstein. “I asked her if she’d been to the palace. And she said, ‘I got to sleep with him,’” Ms Andriano told the Mail. “I said ‘What? You’re f — ing with me’ and she said, ‘No, I got to sleep with him.’ She didn’t seem upset about it. She thought it was pretty cool.” A week later, Ms Giuffre had returned to Florida and Ms Andriano, who was just 14 at the time, said she asked the older girl to show her a picture of the prince. Ms Adriano said Ms Giuffre showed her the photo of herself posing in a pink tank top with Prince Andrew’s arm wrapped around her waist and Ms Maxwell grinning in the background. “Virginia just couldn’t believe it,” Ms Andriano told the Mail. “Maxwell had told her she had a surprise for her and I guess the surprise was Prince Andrew. She was excited. I guess when you’re meeting somebody that famous, I would have been excited, too. “She said they had dinner and they had sex. She didn’t say anything about what they ate or where they were — that’s not what we were talking about. It was just that she couldn’t believe she got to sleep with Prince Andrew.” Ms Andriano testified at Ms Maxwell’s trial that it was Ms Giuffre who introduced her to Mr Epstein and Ms Maxwell when they were teens growing up in Florida in the early 2000s. She said she was sexually abused by Mr Epstein at his Palm Beach mansion hundreds of times over the next few years, during so-called massage sessions that Ms Maxwell helped arrange. At Ms Maxwell’s trial in lower Manhattan, Ms Andriano told the jury that Ms Giuffre had told her she could make some money by visiting Mr Epstein’s mansion and giving him a massage. During her first visit to the estate, she said Mr Epstein stripped naked in front of her and Ms Giuffre in his massage room and laid on the massage face down. “And I looked at Virginia and she eye-motioned to me to say, ‘don’t worry, it will be OK’. Forty-five minutes into the massage, he flipped over. I stepped back and Virginia climbed on top of him and proceeded to have sex with him,” Ms Andriano recalled. “I didn’t know what to do or say or where to go, so I sat on the couch and watched until it was finished,” she said. “We walked back downstairs and Maxwell asked, ‘How did everything go?’ Virginia gave her a look to say it was a great session and that’s when Maxwell asked me for my telephone number.” Ms Maxwell handed her three $US100 bills for her service, Ms Andriano said.

Virginia was over the age of consent in NY which is why there are no criminal charges.

Going by the testimony of the very young girl who Virginia recruited to massage Epstein it doesn't sound like sexual assault by Andrew on that occasion.

Should we be outraged that Virginia recruited other young girls for Epstein which is what Maxwell was on trial for?

We need a post consent pill to shore up consent..... make sure it isn't aborted in favour of a cash pursuit.

These girls knew what they were doing, and in many jurisdictions they would be legal age.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-59987935


Prince Andrew loses military titles and use of HRH

Published

15 minutes ago


https://media.gab.com/system/preview_cards/images/021/169/706/original/c3460e17c878ae1b.jpeg



The Duke of York's military titles and royal patronages have been returned to the Queen, Buckingham Palace has said.

Prince Andrew, 61, will also stop using the style His Royal Highness in an official capacity, a royal source said.

It comes as he faces a US civil action over sexual assault allegations - claims he has consistently denied.

A source close to the duke said he would "continue to defend himself" against the case brought in New York by Virginia Giuffre.

A judge in the city ruled on Wednesday that the case brought by Ms Giuffre could continue, after the prince tried to have it dismissed.

    Giuffre unlikely to just want money, says lawyer
    What do charities get from having a royal patron?
    Maitlis: Prince's jaw-dropping TV interview now critical
    What's next for Prince Andrew?

Buckingham Palace said in a statement: "With the Queen's approval and agreement, the Duke of York's military affiliations and Royal patronages have been returned to the Queen.

"The Duke of York will continue not to undertake any public duties and is defending this case as a private citizen."

All Prince Andrew's roles have been returned to the Queen with immediate effect, and will be redistributed to other members of the Royal Family, a source said.

A spokesperson for the Ministry of Defence said it had no comment about the duke's military titles being handed back to the Queen, and that it was a matter for the Palace.

On Thursday, a letter - released by anti-monarchy pressure group Republic - was signed by more than 150 Royal Navy, RAF and Army veterans asking the Queen to strip Prince Andrew of his eight British military titles.

Lisa Jones wrote on Jan 13^th, 2022 at 9:42pm:

There's no need for Aussie to do that. You simply needed to continue posting the rest of your article. It explained quite a number of issues quite clearly. Ms Giuffre's legal action is a civil case filed by a private party for monetary damages, as opposed to a criminal case filed by the state. Arick Fudali, a partner at New York legal firm Bloom, which has represented nine of Epstein's victims, told BBC Radio 4's Today programme that "very few" of such cases ended up going to trial but there was a "small chance" this could. The alternatives are that it is settled beforehand, it is struck out by a judge, or the complainant ceases the action. Melissa Murray, professor of law at New York University, said Prince Andrew "could be on the hook for significant money damages". "This is not about whether or not Prince Andrew will go to jail - he has no criminal exposure from this particular case," she told the BBC. Asked how likely it was that the case would to go to trial, she said Prince Andrew's team would probably be more worried that it comes at a "really unfortunate time", as Ms Maxwell is due to stand trial in November. She has pleaded not guilty to federal charges that she conspired with Epstein in the abuse of four under-age girls. Prof Murray said: "With this civil suit pending and her about to go to trial on these criminal charges, there may be even more pressure - and indeed temptation - for her to co-operate with federal prosecutors and perhaps provide more information about all of the individuals who were in the orbit of Jeffrey Epstein and that could, allegedly, include the prince himself."

So it's a grab for cash rather than a desire to see alleged sexual predators brought before the court.

Love the wording on some news outlets that Andrew had "returned" his military titles and patronages ...

BULLDUST!

The Firm has instructed Liz to strip him of the title HRH and strip him of his military titles and patronages.  :)

Good job!

Captain Nemo wrote on Jan 14^th, 2022 at 12:41pm:

Love the wording on some news outlets that Andrew had "returned" his military titles and patronages ... BULLDUST! The Firm has instructed Liz to strip him of the title HRH and strip him of his military titles and patronages.  :) Good job!

Liz is not amused.

It was Queen Victoria who was famously not amused. She phrased it using the royal wee.

On the throne 64 years—constipation!

Pretty soon Andy will be put on a ship and sent down under, we don't want him, Tasmania can have him.

Johnnie wrote on Jan 14^th, 2022 at 3:50pm:

Pretty soon Andy will be put on a ship and sent down under, we don't want him, Tasmania can have him.

Maybe ScoMo can make him our next Governor General?

After all - all he wanted was a root.   ;D

Bobby. wrote on Jan 14^th, 2022 at 3:52pm:

Johnnie wrote on Jan 14th, 2022 at 3:50pm: Pretty soon Andy will be put on a ship and sent down under, we don't want him, Tasmania can have him. Maybe ScoMo can make him our next Governor General? After all - all he wanted was a root.   ;D

Isn't that a royal type title, i don't think he qualifies for those positions anymore but Scomo might be able to pull some strings with the Royal Highness.

Its going to be an expensive root by the looks, and he already paid once.

Bobby. wrote on Jan 14^th, 2022 at 6:30am:

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-59987935 Prince Andrew loses military titles and use of HRH Published 15 minutes ago https://media.gab.com/system/preview_cards/images/021/169/706/original/c3460e17c878ae1b.jpeg The Duke of York's military titles and royal patronages have been returned to the Queen, Buckingham Palace has said. Prince Andrew, 61, will also stop using the style His Royal Highness in an official capacity, a royal source said. It comes as he faces a US civil action over sexual assault allegations - claims he has consistently denied. A source close to the duke said he would "continue to defend himself" against the case brought in New York by Virginia Giuffre. A judge in the city ruled on Wednesday that the case brought by Ms Giuffre could continue, after the prince tried to have it dismissed.     Giuffre unlikely to just want money, says lawyer     What do charities get from having a royal patron?     Maitlis: Prince's jaw-dropping TV interview now critical     What's next for Prince Andrew? Buckingham Palace said in a statement: "With the Queen's approval and agreement, the Duke of York's military affiliations and Royal patronages have been returned to the Queen. "The Duke of York will continue not to undertake any public duties and is defending this case as a private citizen." All Prince Andrew's roles have been returned to the Queen with immediate effect, and will be redistributed to other members of the Royal Family, a source said. A spokesperson for the Ministry of Defence said it had no comment about the duke's military titles being handed back to the Queen, and that it was a matter for the Palace. On Thursday, a letter - released by anti-monarchy pressure group Republic - was signed by more than 150 Royal Navy, RAF and Army veterans asking the Queen to strip Prince Andrew of his eight British military titles.

Wow


Quote:

.......... Buckingham Palace said in a statement: "With the Queen's approval and agreement, the Duke of York's military affiliations and Royal patronages have been returned to the Queen. "The Duke of York will continue not to undertake any public duties and is defending this case as a private citizen." All Prince Andrew's roles have been returned to the Queen with immediate effect, and will be redistributed to other members of the Royal Family, a source said.         ................

Johnnie wrote on Jan 14^th, 2022 at 4:09pm:

Bobby. wrote on Jan 14th, 2022 at 3:52pm: Johnnie wrote on Jan 14th, 2022 at 3:50pm: Pretty soon Andy will be put on a ship and sent down under, we don't want him, Tasmania can have him. Maybe ScoMo can make him our next Governor General? After all - all he wanted was a root.   ;D Isn't that a royal type title, i don't think he qualifies for those positions anymore but Scomo might be able to pull some strings with the Royal Highness. Its going to be an expensive root by the looks.

A root which he sincerely regrets.   ;D

Bobby. wrote on Jan 14^th, 2022 at 2:25pm:

Captain Nemo wrote on Jan 14th, 2022 at 12:41pm: Love the wording on some news outlets that Andrew had "returned" his military titles and patronages ... BULLDUST! The Firm has instructed Liz to strip him of the title HRH and strip him of his military titles and patronages.  :) Good job! Liz is not amused.

Wrong! Liz knows exactly what she's doing.

She's making it APPEAR as though she ie The Firm is distancing itself from this fiasco.

Meantime she's in damage control mode. The family's reputation is at stake.

Liz has no doubt organised for the best lawyer that money can buy. To get her son off the hook.

After that ....everything that's been taken from Andrew will be returned to him. A smokescreen/crisis will suddenly appear to distract attention and deflect the public well away from Liz and Andrew.

And all this will be nothing more than a distant memory.

I seriously loathe this well connected institution which has privileged such a disgusting family.

Baronvonrort wrote on Jan 13^th, 2022 at 10:38pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jan 13th, 2022 at 10:08pm: Sprintcyclist wrote on Jan 13th, 2022 at 10:01pm: Super Nova wrote on Jan 13th, 2022 at 9:49pm: Andrew's reputation is ruined no matter what happens. yes, and so it should be. Yep. Agreed. https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/virginia-giuffre-allegedly-told-fellow-maxwell-victim-she-slept-with-prince-andrew/news-story/c62e96c1489ef4534538a17e24afd357 From your link Quote: She said she recalled Ms Giuffre texting her from London in March 2001 to say that she was going out to dinner with Prince Andrew, Ms Maxwell and Mr Epstein. “I asked her if she’d been to the palace. And she said, ‘I got to sleep with him,’” Ms Andriano told the Mail. “I said ‘What? You’re f — ing with me’ and she said, ‘No, I got to sleep with him.’ She didn’t seem upset about it. She thought it was pretty cool.” A week later, Ms Giuffre had returned to Florida and Ms Andriano, who was just 14 at the time, said she asked the older girl to show her a picture of the prince. Ms Adriano said Ms Giuffre showed her the photo of herself posing in a pink tank top with Prince Andrew’s arm wrapped around her waist and Ms Maxwell grinning in the background. “Virginia just couldn’t believe it,” Ms Andriano told the Mail. “Maxwell had told her she had a surprise for her and I guess the surprise was Prince Andrew. She was excited. I guess when you’re meeting somebody that famous, I would have been excited, too. “She said they had dinner and they had sex. She didn’t say anything about what they ate or where they were — that’s not what we were talking about. It was just that she couldn’t believe she got to sleep with Prince Andrew.” Ms Andriano testified at Ms Maxwell’s trial that it was Ms Giuffre who introduced her to Mr Epstein and Ms Maxwell when they were teens growing up in Florida in the early 2000s. She said she was sexually abused by Mr Epstein at his Palm Beach mansion hundreds of times over the next few years, during so-called massage sessions that Ms Maxwell helped arrange. At Ms Maxwell’s trial in lower Manhattan, Ms Andriano told the jury that Ms Giuffre had told her she could make some money by visiting Mr Epstein’s mansion and giving him a massage. During her first visit to the estate, she said Mr Epstein stripped naked in front of her and Ms Giuffre in his massage room and laid on the massage face down. “And I looked at Virginia and she eye-motioned to me to say, ‘don’t worry, it will be OK’. Forty-five minutes into the massage, he flipped over. I stepped back and Virginia climbed on top of him and proceeded to have sex with him,” Ms Andriano recalled. “I didn’t know what to do or say or where to go, so I sat on the couch and watched until it was finished,” she said. “We walked back downstairs and Maxwell asked, ‘How did everything go?’ Virginia gave her a look to say it was a great session and that’s when Maxwell asked me for my telephone number.” Ms Maxwell handed her three $US100 bills for her service, Ms Andriano said. Virginia was over the age of consent in NY which is why there are no criminal charges. Going by the testimony of the very young girl who Virginia recruited to massage Epstein it doesn't sound like sexual assault by Andrew on that occasion. Should we be outraged that Virginia recruited other young girls for Epstein which is what Maxwell was on trial for?

Forget about the age of consent.

She's an under 18 yr old commoner. Under 18. Remember that. The Act she's relying on refers to children under 18.

He's a much older/well connected man who also happens to be xth in line to the British throne.

There's an imbalance of power.

And note the other terms within the legislation she's relying on. It's in her favour.

Irrespective of all this....Andrew will get off. Liz will make sure of that. And after that happens we'll hardly hear about Andrew.

The well connected and privileged look after each other. Always...irrespective of who they vote for.

Edit: The lawyers involved on BOTH sides will make a lot of money AND become very well known. They will be the real winners.

One thing that's important to remember about Elizabeth II: she's been trained to be a commander-in-chief of an imperial army; she's not an over-doting little old lady overwhelmed by naivety and self-pity over her sometime poor choices.

She's been trained to defend her realm against all enemies, including her own family, as all her predecessors were.

And she's been doing it for 70 years.

MeisterEckhart wrote on Jan 14^th, 2022 at 4:26pm:

One thing that's important to remember about Elizabeth II: she's been trained to be a commander-in-chief of an imperial army; she's not an over-doting little old lady overwhelmed by naivety and self-pity over her sometime poor choices. She's been trained to defend her realm against all enemies, including her own family, as all her predecessors were. And she's been doing it for 70 years.

She's a very formidable and powerful woman who has ACCESS to the best public relations and legal minds on the planet.

Anyone know who the lawyers acting for Andrew might be?

Lisa Jones wrote on Jan 14^th, 2022 at 4:36pm:

MeisterEckhart wrote on Jan 14th, 2022 at 4:26pm: One thing that's important to remember about Elizabeth II: she's been trained to be a commander-in-chief of an imperial army; she's not an over-doting little old lady overwhelmed by naivety and self-pity over her sometime poor choices. She's been trained to defend her realm against all enemies, including her own family, as all her predecessors were. And she's been doing it for 70 years. She's a very formidable and powerful woman who has ACCESS to the best public relations and legal minds on the planet.

I'm sure that's true.

She's directly related to Mary Queen of Scots, who her namesake, Elizabeth I, had executed, so there's no room for self-pity or meekness in her blood.

Hi Lisa,
I bet Andy will never appear in the US court.
He doesn't want to risk Supermax and Bubba waiting for him.   ;D


https://www.ozpolitic.com/album/forum-attachments/Bubba_says_the_soap.jpg

MeisterEckhart wrote on Jan 14^th, 2022 at 4:39pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jan 14th, 2022 at 4:36pm: MeisterEckhart wrote on Jan 14th, 2022 at 4:26pm: One thing that's important to remember about Elizabeth II: she's been trained to be a commander-in-chief of an imperial army; she's not an over-doting little old lady overwhelmed by naivety and self-pity over her sometime poor choices. She's been trained to defend her realm against all enemies, including her own family, as all her predecessors were. And she's been doing it for 70 years. She's a very formidable and powerful woman who has ACCESS to the best public relations and legal minds on the planet. Anyone know who the lawyers acting for Andrew might be? I'm sure that's true. She's directly related to Mary Queen of Scots, who her namesake, Elizabeth I, had executed, so there's no room for self-pity or meekness in her blood.

She knows her monarchy's days are numbered. Not many Gen X or Gen Y like her/want her there.

Also what happened with Diana is still a sore point.

At some stage (not now) I'm going to start a topic on the bitch and I'll rip into her. Big time. It won't be easy to read my posts but as I've been part of a very big UK Facebook group for some years now  .... I know first hand how much her subjects can't abide the privileged non tax paying money hungry grub that she is. And her family's handouts are astronomical. They basically do nothing all day except attend a few luncheons which co function as marketing opportunities.

Anyway....I've got to sort dinner out here. Later.

Edit : Where's Aussie? Is he ok? Anyone know?

Captain Nemo wrote on Jan 14^th, 2022 at 12:41pm:

Love the wording on some news outlets that Andrew had "returned" his military titles and patronages ... BULLDUST! The Firm has instructed Liz to strip him of the title HRH and strip him of his military titles and patronages.  :) Good job!

That's is an issue of English comprehension on your behalf.

What does this mean?
' ....... "With the Queen's approval and agreement, the Duke of York's military affiliations and Royal patronages have been returned to the Queen. ...... '

Bobby. wrote on Jan 14^th, 2022 at 4:42pm:

Hi Lisa, I bet Andy will never appear in the US court. He doesn't want to risk Supermax and Bubba waiting for him.   ;D https://www.ozpolitic.com/album/forum-attachments/Bubba_says_the_soap.jpg

Are you sure you're not revealing a personal psycho-sexual fantasy?

MeisterEckhart wrote on Jan 14^th, 2022 at 4:53pm:

Bobby. wrote on Jan 14th, 2022 at 4:42pm: Hi Lisa, I bet Andy will never appear in the US court. He doesn't want to risk Supermax and Bubba waiting for him.   ;D https://www.ozpolitic.com/album/forum-attachments/Bubba_says_the_soap.jpg Are you sure you're not revealing a personal psycho-sexual fantasy?

No - just the reality of Supermax.

Booby really likes that photo of Bubba, this must be the tenth time she has posted it.

Lisa Jones wrote on Jan 14^th, 2022 at 4:51pm:

MeisterEckhart wrote on Jan 14th, 2022 at 4:39pm: Lisa Jones wrote on Jan 14th, 2022 at 4:36pm: MeisterEckhart wrote on Jan 14th, 2022 at 4:26pm: One thing that's important to remember about Elizabeth II: she's been trained to be a commander-in-chief of an imperial army; she's not an over-doting little old lady overwhelmed by naivety and self-pity over her sometime poor choices. She's been trained to defend her realm against all enemies, including her own family, as all her predecessors were. And she's been doing it for 70 years. She's a very formidable and powerful woman who has ACCESS to the best public relations and legal minds on the planet. Anyone know who the lawyers acting for Andrew might be? I'm sure that's true. She's directly related to Mary Queen of Scots, who her namesake, Elizabeth I, had executed, so there's no room for self-pity or meekness in her blood. She knows her monarchy's days are numbered. Not many Gen X or Gen Y like her/want her there.

I don't believe that's true in the UK.

Her days are only numbered by the number of days she will live.

The British monarchy is the incredibly unbroken surviving remnant of the British island's history for over 1000 years; Elizabeth II is also the direct descendant of Alfred the Great.

It is second only to the papacy, which is the direct inheritor of the Roman Caesars.

It is, for the British, literally living history.

https://i.imgur.com/nLgCAl8.jpg

;D

The only real solution for the royal family is for Andrew to fall on his sword.

Or, if he is as cowardly as groogy, smiffy or bwyannnnnnnnn.

A little bit of a push my be required

MeisterEckhart wrote on Jan 14^th, 2022 at 4:58pm:

Her days are only numbered by the number of days she will live. The British monarchy is the incredibly unbroken surviving remnant of the British island's history for over 1000 years; Elizabeth II is also the direct descendant of Alfred the Great.

From Wikipedia:


Quote:

The Lindy effect (also known as Lindy's Law[1]) is a theorized phenomenon by which the future life expectancy of some non-perishable things, like a technology or an idea, is proportional to their current age. Thus, the Lindy effect proposes the longer a period something has survived to exist or be used in the present, it is also likely to have a longer remaining life expectancy. Longevity implies a resistance to change, obsolescence or competition and greater odds of continued existence into the future.[2] Where the Lindy effect applies, mortality rate decreases with time. Mathematically, the Lindy effect corresponds to lifetimes following a Pareto probability distribution. The concept is named after Lindy's delicatessen in New York City, where the concept was informally theorized by comedians. The Lindy effect has subsequently been theorized by mathematicians and statisticians.[3][4][1] Nassim Nicholas Taleb has expressed the Lindy effect in terms of "distance from an Absorbing barrier."[5] The Lindy effect applies to "non-perishable" items, those that do not have an "unavoidable expiration date".[2] For example, human beings are perishable: most humans live for about 80 years. So the Lindy effect does not apply to individual human lifespan: it is unlikely for a 5-year-old human to die within the next 5 years, but it is very likely for a 70-year-old human to die within the next 70 years, while the Lindy effect would predict these to have equal probability.

What the Lindy Effect is saying, for example, if a book has been continuously in print for 50 years, chances are that it will be in print another 50 years.


Quote:

If a book has been in print for forty years, I can expect it to be in print for another forty years. But, and that is the main difference, if it survives another decade, then it will be expected to be in print another fifty years. This, simply, as a rule, tells you why things that have been around for a long time are not "aging" like persons, but "aging" in reverse. Every year that passes without extinction doubles the additional life expectancy. This is an indicator of some robustness. The robustness of an item is proportional to its life! [8]

Could it also apply to the British monarchy? I believe it could.

It's true to say that people value their indigenous institutions that appear immune to collapse over time.

During the debates over Scotland's independence, Elizabeth II did not waste the opportunity to remind the Scots that she was descended from Scottish nobility (notably the most famous Scots, after Macbeth: Robert the Bruce and Mary, Queen of Scots).

https://www.private-eye.co.uk/pictures/covers/full/696_big.jpg

---

MeisterEckhart wrote on Jan 14^th, 2022 at 4:26pm:

One thing that's important to remember about Elizabeth II: she's been trained to be a commander-in-chief of an imperial army; she's not an over-doting little old lady overwhelmed by naivety and self-pity over her sometime poor choices. She's been trained to defend her realm against all enemies, including her own family, as all her predecessors were. And she's been doing it for 70 years.

That's why her days and the days of that monarchy are numbered.

How many more years before she dies? 

5 years max. That's it.