clapham_gull
Legacy Fan
- Aug 20, 2003
- 25,447
"Americans" aren't, some American Lawyers are and Andrew (I believe) could be subject to diplomatic immunity also.
So there isn't really any hypocrisy.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[News] Prince Andrew interviewed about allegations
- Thread starter Ernest
- Start date
"Americans" aren't, some American Lawyers are and Andrew (I believe) could be subject to diplomatic immunity also.
So there isn't really any hypocrisy.
Justice
Dangerous Idiot
Have no idea from this case although it’s been known for nonces to select their prey carefully kids from care homes etc. I doubt the girls are from loving caring families. They are abusers and should be hanged for their sick crimes.
blue-shifted
Banned
Indeed Nibble. I have no problem with that. Anyone (male or female) forcing themselves upon adults or minors sexualy should be held to account whatever their status.
What Wozza was implying was something very different.
Anyway, fifteen years and three kids later we are still very happy.
BTW we met in Kent not Thailand
Ahhh, so you had her flown over beforehand. Well saves you a trip I suppose
herecomesaregular
We're in the pipe, 5 by 5
I'd be happy with that exchange.
A dark, closed airport, a helicopter lands, a hooded prisoner each on the tarmac are pushed out alone to walk towards and past each other, a single sniper shot rings out......
Here we go! Mr Putdown gets owned and starts all the "you wouldn't say that to my face" crap. Big brave keyboard warrior. But what do you expect from palace eh?
Mr Putdown
Well-known member
“Owned” seriously?
What I actually meant was you wouldn’t say that to someone if you were talking face to face, yet some would happily do so on social media.
“Owned” seriously?
What I actually meant was you wouldn’t say that to someone if you were talking face to face, yet some would happily do so on social media.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.......same ol' crap. Go spout it on your own shit club's forums rather than polluting ours with your garbage.
Dick Knights Mumm
Take me Home Falmer Road
Do you check they have a provisional drivers licence ?
Mr Putdown
Well-known member
On a thread that has absolutely nothing to do with football you seem determined to bring your pathetic rivalry into it.
How about you grow up.
Mr Putdown
Well-known member
So that makes things ok in your book does it?
I must say I am not surprised by your response.............
lawros left foot
Glory hunting since 1969
“Owned” seriously?
What I actually meant was you wouldn’t say that to someone if you were talking face to face, yet some would happily do so on social media.
The thing is, I probably would say that to someone’s face.
I would hope that it was taken in the spirit of which it was intended. A quip, a lighthearted comment, but, as you’ve shown, there are some who would be pofaced about it, and try to ascend to the moral high ground. If these persons showed a sense of humour and responded in a similar manner it would probably enhance their reputation in a place that they are not very popular to start with, and I would prefer a returned insult than a supposed morally superior sermonising comment.
But, hey ho, each to their own.
Pretty pink fairy
Banned
- Jan 30, 2008
- 31,981
What are you going on about
Regards
DF
To try to justify what can only be described as unsavoury behaviour with a comment on seedy holiday destinations/sex tourism etc, I find abhorrent, obviously with your response you don't, ok.
Pretty pink fairy
Banned
- Jan 30, 2008
- 31,981
symyjym
Banned
I have only seen clips of his interview on the news and I think he would have been better off admitting what he did because 16 is the age of consent and she was 17 at the time. Embarrassing yes, illegal no.
The critical questions are:
Did he make a direct payment to her?
Was he aware that Epstein paid her?
Did he order her and pay Epstein?
If he denied knowledge of any payment being made it would be difficult to take the legal process any further with him because only he and Epstein would know.
Surely denying all knowledge of the event, and the girl, is more damaging for him than admitting the encounter?
The critical questions are:
Did he make a direct payment to her?
Was he aware that Epstein paid her?
Did he order her and pay Epstein?
If he denied knowledge of any payment being made it would be difficult to take the legal process any further with him because only he and Epstein would know.
Surely denying all knowledge of the event, and the girl, is more damaging for him than admitting the encounter?
Isn't the age of consent 18 in the Virgin Islands, where one of the 'sexual encounters' (rapes) is alleged to have taken place?
Pavilionaire
Well-known member
- Jul 7, 2003
- 30,644
For fans of Alan Partridge out there. The highlight of Facebook for me is the group "We need to talk about Alan Partridge" where today someone has started the thread "Give me your Alan radio description of a song you love".
In an attempt to combine Partridge and the hapless royal I've gone for:
"That was Shaggy with his tribute to Prince Andrew "It Wasn't Me". Shaggy's real name is Orville Richard Burrell, presumably named after the young green bird on the end of that chap's hand...which again brings us back to Prince Andrew. The time, it's approaching high noon..."
In an attempt to combine Partridge and the hapless royal I've gone for:
"That was Shaggy with his tribute to Prince Andrew "It Wasn't Me". Shaggy's real name is Orville Richard Burrell, presumably named after the young green bird on the end of that chap's hand...which again brings us back to Prince Andrew. The time, it's approaching high noon..."