Page 6 of 12 FirstFirst 123456789101112 LastLast
Results 126 to 150 of 296
  1. #126
    Thailand Expat Backspin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    11,211
    Quote Originally Posted by TheRealKW View Post
    Those are not the only qualifications for being trafficked.





    Again, a modicum of understanding of the topic would answer that question for you.


    Your celebrated, intentional ignorance of this topic is astounding.
    So because she had a shitty childhood, and ended up with this life, means that she was trafficked ? There's lots of women with bad childhoods, who don't end up at billionaires houses , doing sexual favors for money.

    I cant stand these older Dbag rich guys who get into this. But i also dont have time for these sluts that choose to get into a lifestyle and then claim victim when they choose to change careers

  2. #127
    Thailand Expat Backspin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    11,211
    Quote Originally Posted by TheRealKW View Post
    Those are not the only qualifications for being trafficked.





    Again, a modicum of understanding of the topic would answer that question for you.


    Your celebrated, intentional ignorance of this topic is astounding.
    Prince Andrew accuser was not a sex slave, former friends claim


    Former friends of the woman who has claimed that she slept with Prince Andrew have disputed her claims that she was a sex slave.


    Associates of Virginia Roberts said that she lived the high life earning thousands of dollars.


    They said that she was ‘head b****’ of a group of 10 girls who worked for billionaire paedophile Jeffrey Epstein at his mansion and that she would ‘brag’ about her earnings.

    Crystal Figueroa, whose brother dated Roberts in the early 2000s, said Miss Roberts also asked her if she knew any girls ‘who are kind of slutty’.


    She said: ‘She would always brag about all the money she had. I don’t think anybody was forcing her to do anything.’


    In 2001, the year that she was supposedly slept with Andrew, Miss Roberts’ life could not have been more different than the jet-set world in which they met.


    At the time she was paying the rent for a two-bedroom apartment in Royal Palm Beach that she shared with her boyfriend Anthony Figueroa and his friend Anthony Valladares.


    Mr Valladares said: ‘The only time she’d leave is when she would go on dates.


    ‘She’d say: ‘I’d have to go to my millionaire’s house.’ She’d leave for a day or two or more, and then come back with money.’




    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...nds-claim.html

  3. #128
    Away

    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    3,273
    The guy sounds like a dick, sleeping with 17 year olds.

    Amazing what money can buy! He sounds like he had a harem.

    Guys with power and money who take advantage of girls and women are the lowest on my totem pole radar.

  4. #129
    Thailand Expat Backspin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    11,211
    Quote Originally Posted by MarilynMonroe View Post
    The guy sounds like a dick, sleeping with 17 year olds.

    Amazing what money can buy! He sounds like he had a harem.

    Guys with power and money who take advantage of girls and women are the lowest on my totem pole radar.
    Won't argue with you there. The women who freely and knowingly take the other side of the trade and then claim victim once they move onto another career are equally as low.

  5. #130
    Away

    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    3,273
    Quote Originally Posted by Backspin View Post
    Won't argue with you there. The women who freely and knowingly take the other side of the trade and then claim victim once they move onto another career are equally as low.
    Right, but there is a difference.. a child is defenceless against men who traffic them. To me, a girl is a child even at 17. Where I live, the legal age is 18 to be an adult. A woman playing both sides, well that is her choice and she should live with the consequences.

  6. #131
    I am not a cat
    nidhogg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    18,312
    Probably helps if we all start on the same page:

    https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/human...afficking.html
    What is Human Trafficking?

    Article 3, paragraph (a) of the Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons defines Trafficking in Persons as the recruitment, transportation, transfer, harbouring or receipt of persons, by means of the threat or use of force or other forms of coercion, of abduction, of fraud, of deception, of the abuse of power or of a position of vulnerability or of the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person, for the purpose of exploitation. Exploitation shall include, at a minimum, the exploitation of the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual exploitation, forced labour or services, slavery or practices similar to slavery, servitude or the removal of organs

  7. #132
    R.I.P.
    Wally Dorian Raffles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Last Online
    23-07-2020 @ 06:41 AM
    Location
    Location: Location: Three sausages went to the station, and wound up at immigration!
    Posts
    6,283
    Quote Originally Posted by Backspin View Post
    So because she had a shitty childhood, and ended up with this life, means that she was trafficked ? There's lots of women with bad childhoods, who don't end up at billionaires houses , doing sexual favors for money.

    I cant stand these older Dbag rich guys who get into this. But i also dont have time for these sluts that choose to get into a lifestyle and then claim victim when they choose to change careers
    Trauma can take decades to surface. She may have thought she was doing it on her own free will, and never realised how much she was groomed by sleaze balls. Most probably spent her life thinking she was a dirty whore - without realizing that she was a victim.

  8. #133
    I'm in Jail

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Last Online
    25-02-2024 @ 11:45 PM
    Posts
    11,602
    I'm sure it all came out in the wash.

  9. #134
    Thailand Expat
    Klondyke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Last Online
    26-09-2021 @ 10:28 PM
    Posts
    10,105
    Justice blind or blinded by titles? A tale of Prince Andrew and Julian Assange

    George Galloway
    was a member of the British Parliament for nearly 30 years. He presents TV and radio shows (including on RT). He is a film-maker, writer and a renowned orator.
    26 Nov, 2019 17:40



    The grand old Duke of York sleeps tonight on a feather pillow in a royal palace. Julian Assange, the publisher of the century sleeps in the hell of Belmarsh Prison, Britain’s own Guantanamo Bay.

    The Duke of York lied about the length duration and nature of his relationship with the presumed deceased child-sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein. Julian Assange told the truth about the high crimes and misdemeanours of the rich and powerful during times of war and peace.

    The FBI need to speak to the Queen’s favorite son, but no power on earth will be deployed to make him testify about what he might have seen, or even have participated in, at the townhouse in Manhattan, a Sodom and Gomorrah of our times.

    The same US Justice system has caused the cruel incarceration of Assange and his Kafkaesque entrapment in an extradition saga which may last for years - if he doesn’t die before it is over as no less than 60 doctors have recently warned he may well do.

    The US-UK extradition arrangements may be the most unequal treaty ever concluded by Her Majesty’s ministers. In this case the former Blair government Home Secretary David Blunkett, a blind man who could, nonetheless, see exactly what he was doing.

    In essence extradition from Britain to the US became virtually on request without the slightest need to show just cause. But not vice versa. It would be easier to pull a camel through the eye of a needle than for Britain to extradite a US citizen to face justice in the UK.

    I was a member of the British Parliament at the time this treaty was signed. Not that this mattered a jot or tittle. The Treaty was signed during the Summer Recess when no Parliament was sitting and through the exercise of the Royal Prerogative.

    Only when it was already in operation was I even able to oppose the extradition of its first victims - alleged City of London financial fraudsters, as well as a fitted-up “terrorist” London man Babar Ahmad.

    Under the old extradition rules neither case could have satisfied the previous requirement to produce prima facia evidence sufficient to persuade a British judge. Under the new Treaty it was easy peasy lemon squeezy. And off they went.

    Prince Andrew will face no such ordeal albeit now banished from Royal Circles and effectively reduced to the ranks, his epaulettes ripped off his glittering array of obscure medals turned to scrap metal on his tunic.

    Although accused of sexual abuse of a teenager and with an admitted close relationship to the alleged procurer of underage female victims, Ghislaine Maxwell, in whose London home it is alleged one of the sexual encounters took place - the US will never require the Prince to give evidence and the UK will never offer him up.

    Assange, who was falsely accused of rape, has spent virtually the last decade locked up in one form or other of incarceration. And faces up to 175 years of prison time, if successfully extradited.

    It is a tale of two cities - Buckingham Palace and Belmarsh Maximum Security Prison.

    A tale of two individuals - one now a proven liar and one a well attested truth-teller.

    A tale of two fates. The Prince who became a moral pauper, the other an impecunious journalist who became a moral giant.

    It is a tale of our times.

    https://www.rt.com/op-ed/474374-prin...stein-assange/

  10. #135
    Thailand Expat
    taxexile's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    19,294
    It is a tale of our times.
    as written by the wily but traitorous galloway and published by the russian propaganda arm "russia today"

    assange ...... has spent virtually the last decade locked up in one form or other of incarceration.
    he has only been locked up for a few months, prior to that he chose incarceration rather than facing up to his misdemeanour. he could have walked out any time and faced the minor charge breaching his bail conditions, for which he eventually received a 50 week jail sentence.

    prince andrew should only agree to go to the usa and be questioned by the usa authorities once they return to the uk the woman who ran over and killed that young boy outside the us airbase a couple of months ago.

    hypocrisy and dark deals will always trump "doing the right thing" in the world of politics, diplomacy and trade.

    thats how the world has always worked, and how it will always work. blame human nature for that.

  11. #136
    Thailand Expat
    taxexile's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    19,294
    galloway
    Only when it was already in operation was I even able to oppose the extradition of its first victims - alleged City of London financial fraudsters, as well as a fitted-up “terrorist” London man Babar Ahmad.



    Babar Ahmad - a convicted terrorist - is pulling the wool over the liberal media's eyes


    Freed from jail, bin Laden’s fund-raiser appears to be contrite, but falls back on the old 'good faith’ excuse

    Babar Ahmad was extradited to the US in 2012 after an eight-year legal fight, earlier admitted his role in operating Azzam Publications



    From Tony Blair over the Iraq dossier, to the parliamentary expenses cheats who ended in jail, the last resort of any scoundrel is to claim that he acted in “good faith”.

    Today, we witness this age-old excuse in daring new territory. The Victoria Derbyshire show on BBC Two will introduce us to Britain’s first-ever “good faith” supporter of Osama bin Laden.

    The man concerned, Babar Ahmad, from Tooting, London, was recently released from a 12-and-a-half-year prison sentence for terror offences.

    "I did it in good faith but, in hindsight, I regret doing that and it was naive of me to do that, because it was a complicated situation
    Babar Ahmad"

    Ahmad, 41, is the Alexander Graham Bell of online terrorism. The website he ran, azzam.com, was the pioneer, the template, for all the thousands of jihadi sites that followed. Set up in 1996, it was the first English-speaking site to publish bin Laden’s declaration of war against the West; the first to offer guidebook-style tips for the aspiring holy warrior; the first to publish Islamic rulings on the “permissibility of martyrdrom operations”.

    Ahmad’s site solicited funds for the Taliban. It described how to get money to their representative in Pakistan, and transferred some money directly. It made overt appeals for people to join the jihad in Afghanistan. And cricially, as Ahmad admitted in court, it went on doing this for at least nine months after bin Laden, with the Taliban’s support and protection, attacked the US, killing 2,996 innocent people.

    Babar Ahmad has called called the actions of Islamic State "alien" and said that it was not "jihad" which he described as being designed to protect innocent people from terror


    Ahmad, who pleaded guilty to providing material support for terrorism, also radicalised others through personal contact. His “Tooting Circle” included Saajid Badat, sentenced to 13 years for his part in the Richard Reid shoe-bomber plot. Badat testified that Ahmad arranged for him to receive “training in taking up arms”, and that “when we talk[ed] about jihad it meant armed jihad, taking up arms”.

    Now, surely to the immense relief of us all, Ahmad tells the Beeb that he didn’t really mean any of it. As he explained: “I did it in good faith, but in hindsight, I regret doing that and it was naive of me to do that, because it was a complicated situation.”

    Yes, he did support bin Laden, but “not knowingly,” because he did not know what the al-Qaeda leader “was really up to.” Sticklers might object that perhaps 9/11 should have given something of a clue – not to mention the declaration of war published by Ahmad on his own website.

    Those with more detailed knowledge of the case can point out that this is also, in fact, the third version of events Ahmad has given us.

    Fighting extradition to be tried in the United States, where his site was hosted, Ahmad became a cause célèbre for many of the liberal classes. He claimed that he was an “innocent, law-abiding member of the public”, who had been “terrorised in order to satisfy some political ambitions”.

    “The crime that I committed is that I dared... to seek justice in an unjust world”, he declared.

    Once the extradition battle had failed, having been prolonged literally for years in order to wring out every last drop of propaganda, Ahmad performed a swift handbrake turn, and pleaded guilty to his crimes.

    The trial judge told him: “I view what you did as very serious. What you were doing was enabling bin Laden to be protected in Afghanistan and train the men who drove into the Pentagon and the World Trade Center…

    Your websites were a source of information [to jihadis] unlike anything that had been on the web before.”

    Yet Ahmad is not only a convicted accomplice to mass murder. He was and remains a skilled propagandist – before, during, and now after his imprisonment.


    The campaign to prevent his extradition and “free Babar Ahmad” employed the same “war on Muslims” rhetoric as Ahmad himself used. It seized on his admittedly brutal arrest by the Met to claim that he had been “tortured.” Its explicit, and very effective, message was that in the “police state” for Muslims that is the UK, any British Muslim could suffer the “innocent” Ahmad’s fate. As the campaign kept saying: “Today it’s Babar Ahmad, tomorrow it could be you.”

    Free Babar Ahmad’s spokesman, Bilal Patel, said of the campaign: “The war is not just a legal or military war, it’s an information war and you’ve got to fight it through the press and the web as much as anything else.”

    #BabarSpeaks 1 of the police officers apologised to Ahmad & said: “I’m sorry, but this is how the Americans want it.”https://t.co/8O9F7CVG9G

    — Babar Ahmad (@FreeBabarAhmad) March 13, 2016
    Charmed by his middle-class manner and the success of the campaign to free him, journalists are letting Babar Ahmad spin himself as a latter-day equivalent of that other Tooting political activist, Wolfie Smith, the hapless Seventies sitcom revolutionary.

    Yesterday’s Observer even described him as “another victim of the War on Terror”.

    Babar Ahmad was not a victim of the War on Terror. He was a general in it. And if anyone’s been naive, it’s the media, not him.

    thetelegraphnews

  12. #137
    Thailand Expat
    Klondyke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Last Online
    26-09-2021 @ 10:28 PM
    Posts
    10,105
    No jurisdiction? Scotland Yard forced to explain why it dropped sex trafficking probe into Epstein & Prince Andrew
    29 Nov, 2019



    The Met had to give an explanation for why it stopped investigating allegations of sex trafficking against Jeffrey Epstein after the woman claiming she was forced into sex with the Duke of York accused the police of corruption.

    Virginia Giuffre is pictured in a now notorious photo of Prince Andrew with his hand around her bare waist, with Epstein and the Duke’s ‘friend’ Ghislaine Maxwell in the background. A teenager then, she claims to have had sex with the royal at least three times back in 2001.

    Some fourteen years later she brought her story to the Metropolitan Police Service, only to see the probe dropped rather quickly. “At first the Scotland Yard told me they were going to forensically examine GM’s [Ghislaine Maxwell’s] house in London – next thing I hear, just like the FBI, they were not allowed to pursue the investigation. Corruption in the highelevels [sic] of gov,” Giuffre wrote on Twitter this week.

    The Met confirmed on Thursday that they had indeed launched the probe, interviewed Guiffe, got the advice from the Crown Prosecution Service, and decided the case was out of their jurisdiction to proceed with a full criminal investigation.

    We therefore concluded that the MPS [Metropolitan police service] was not the appropriate authority to conduct enquiries in these circumstances.

    “It was clear that any investigation into human trafficking would be largely focused on activities and relationships outside the UK,” commander for specialist crime Alex Murray said, noting that Scotland Yard once again reviewed its position in 2019 and it remained unchanged.
    Giuffre in the meantime doubled down on her accusations against Prince Andrew in the upcoming interview with the BBC – as the Duke of York faces a growing backlash following his own train wreck interview with Newsnight about his friendship with the US financier.

    He knows what happened, I know what happened and there's only one of us telling the truth.
    https://www.rt.com/uk/474602-scotlan...e-explanation/

  13. #138
    Thailand Expat Saint Willy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Last Online
    30-04-2022 @ 02:44 AM
    Posts
    11,204
    Quote Originally Posted by Klondyke View Post
    https://www.rt.com/uk/474602-scotlan...e-explanation/
    While not a friend of Royals or Britian, Russian Today as a news source?

  14. #139
    Thailand Expat
    Klondyke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Last Online
    26-09-2021 @ 10:28 PM
    Posts
    10,105
    ^My dear friend asks me to go to Russia, painting me in red, for such link, he can read it also elsewhere...

    London police defend decision to drop Jeffrey Epstein investigation

    Virginia Giuffre says Met did not act after she alleged she had been forced to sleep with Prince Andrew

    Thu 28 Nov 2019 14.03 EST Last modified on Fri 29 Nov 2019 11.16 EST

    Scotland Yard has defended its decision to drop an investigation into claims of sex trafficking made against disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein by a woman who says she was forced to sleep with the Duke of York.

    It comes after Virginia Giuffre, who alleged she was trafficked to the UK aged 17 to sleep with Prince Andrew, criticised the Metropolitan police for failing to subject her complaint to a full inquiry in 2015.

    But Scotland Yard, which says it has liaised with “other law enforcement organisations”, explained it concluded not to launch a criminal investigation as it “would be largely focused on activities and relationships outside the UK”.

    Giuffre claims she slept with Andrew three times, including in London in 2001 at the home of his friend Ghislaine Maxwell. A photograph showing the prince with his arm around the then teenager’s shoulder with Maxwell in the background has dogged him in recent weeks as controversy grows surrounding his involvement with Epstein following his disastrous BBC interview.

    On Monday, Giuffre accused Scotland Yard of corruption, writing on Twitter: “At first the Scotland Yard told me they were going to forensically examine GM’s [Ghislaine Maxwell’s] house in London – next thing I hear, just like the FBI, they were not allowed to pursue the investigation. Corruption in the highelevels [sic] of gov.”

    In a statement on Thursday, commander for specialist crime Alex Murray confirmed the Met received an “allegation of non-recent trafficking for sexual exploitation” against Epstein and a British woman relating to “events outside of the UK and an allegation of trafficking to central London in March 2001”.

    He added: “Officers assessed the available evidence, interviewed the complainant and obtained early investigative advice from the Crown Prosecution Service.

    “Following the legal advice, it was clear that any investigation into human trafficking would be largely focused on activities and relationships outside the UK.

    “We therefore concluded that the MPS [Metropolitan police service] was not the appropriate authority to conduct enquiries in these circumstances and, in November 2016, a decision was made that this matter would not proceed to a full criminal investigation.”

    On Thursday night the BBC released a trailer of its interview with Giuffre before its broadcast on Monday.

    “He knows what happened, I know what happened and there’s only one of us telling the truth.”

    The Prince and the Epstein Scandal | @BBCOne | Monday 2nd December, 9pm#BBCPanorama pic.twitter.com/tMIwWBztRR

    November 28, 2019
    After Epstein committed suicide in a New York jail cell in August while awaiting trial for further offences, Murray said the Met reviewed its decision but the force stuck by its original assessment. “The MPS has liaised with other law enforcement organisations but has not received a formal request asking for assistance in connection with this allegation,” he added.

    It comes as security concerns have been raised at Buckingham Palace after a masseuse claims she was invited to Prince Andrew’s bedroom without being properly vetted. Monique Giannelloni has come forward to disclose that she was paid £75 for an appointment with the prince after being introduced by socialite Maxwell.

    Giannelloni alleges that she was not searched, nor asked to sign in, before her appointment at the palace in 2000, which was booked by Prince Andrew’s then assistant Charlotte Manley.

    Giannelloni, who has produced a signed cheque with Buckingham Palace branding in Manley’s name to prove she was paid for the visit, said she was only asked for her car registration plate before being waved inside by aides.

    “It was so easy to get into the palace and it troubled me because I could have been anyone,” she told MailOnline.

    “I didn’t know Andrew and never met anyone from the royal household. Nobody knew me. I wasn’t spoken to by a royal protection officer or asked any questions at all. Nobody checked my bag when I arrived or when I left. I certainly expected more stringent security checks.”

    Buckingham Palace declined to comment.

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...-investigation

  15. #140
    Thailand Expat
    Klondyke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Last Online
    26-09-2021 @ 10:28 PM
    Posts
    10,105
    Actually, The Guardian wrote this already 4 years ago:

    Lawyers fight to compel Prince Andrew to answer claims of sex with girl, 17
    Fri 23 Jan 2015 13.57 EST
    This article is more than 4 years old

    Attorneys for Virginia Roberts request that Andrew answer questions under oath but admit ‘there is no easy means by which to compel his testimony’

    The woman who alleges that she was made to have sex with Prince Andrew when she was 17 may file a request to the British courts under an international treaty to try to compel him to answer questions under oath.

    Lawyers for Virginia Roberts have written to Andrew at Buckingham Palace to ask for a two-hour sworn interview about Roberts’ claim that she was forced into sexual relations with Andrew by his friend Jeffrey Epstein, a wealthy financier and convicted sex offender.

    Andrew spoke publicly on Thursday to “reiterate and to reaffirm” a strenuous denial of the allegation by Buckingham Palace, which describes it as “categorically untrue”.

    The lawyers’ letter, which was made public in a court filing on Wednesday, told Andrew: “The interview could be conducted at a time and place of your choosing.” However, an attempt to deliver the letter by FedEx was apparently rejected by the Palace.

    Jack Scarola, the attorney who wrote the letter, told the Guardian on Thursday that his legal team would try again to deliver the letter through the British embassy in the US. An embassy spokeswoman said at the end of Thursday afternoon that no attempt had been made to deliver it.

    Scarola said that if the letter could not be delivered, he would consider making a new request for Andrew to answer questions under a 1970 Hague convention on taking evidence abroad, to which the US and the UK are both signatories.

    “There is no easy means by which to compel his testimony,” said Scarola. “We are hoping that he will make the decision to voluntarily cooperate. If he chooses not to make that decision, then we will further consider what steps we might take under the Hague convention.”

    Because the attorneys’ request relates to a civil lawsuit in the US courts, and Andrew is not facing any criminal action, issues around whether Andrew is protected by diplomatic immunity, and the extradition treaty between the US and UK, are irrelevant at this stage.

    Andrew cannot easily be subpoenaed to give testimony, as an American resident might be, because he lives outside the jurisdiction of the US courts. Visiting Florida may put him at risk of being served with a subpoena to appear there, lawyers said.

    But a server may find it too difficult to get close enough to the Duke – and past his security detail – to physically hand him legal papers. And it is unlikely that Andrew would be vigorously pursued if he ignored the subpoena and returned to the UK. So to compel Andrew to be interviewed, Roberts’ attorneys would ask the British courts to question him, through a “letter of request”.

    Attorneys may file these requests to the US court considering their case, according to Friedrich Seitz, a Los Angeles-based attorney who has written on the subject. The request may then be passed by the judge to the relevant foreign legal authorities. However, according to guidance published by the US department of justice, American attorneys may actually make these requests directly.

    Because Andrew lives in the UK, the request would be sent to Barbara Fontaine, the Senior Master of the Queen’s Bench Division and Queen’s Remembrancer, at the Royal Courts of Justice in London. Fontaine serves under Sir Brian Leveson, the president of the Queen’s Bench Division, who carried out an inquiry into the ethics of the British media.

    It is not clear how the judiciary might handle a request relating to a member of the royal family. The Hague convention states that a country may reject a request if it “considers that its sovereignty or security would be prejudiced”.

    “International judicial assistance is always discretionary, based upon principles of comity rather than treaty, and is also subject to legal procedures in the requested country,” said Markus Funk, a defence attorney and former prosecutor, who was not referring specifically to the case involving Andrew. “Though governments may be less likely to assist if the subject of the request is a government official,” said Funk.

    According to The Hague’s model letter of request, Roberts’ attorneys should name Prince Andrew as someone they want “examined” for their case, and specify that they want him questioned orally and under oath. They should also supply a list of questions they want Andrew to answer if their request is granted by Fontaine.

    Under directions to the courts from Britain’s ministry of justice, this interview should “be conducted in the same way as if the witness were giving evidence at a trial”. It may be carried out by “any fit and proper person nominated” by Roberts’ attorneys or “any other person whom the court considers suitable”. Andrew would be entitled to have a lawyer present.

    In general, when a Briton is asked for evidence in the US “the deposition would almost certainly take place in the UK – the witness would not be compelled to travel to the US”, said Funk.

    The interviewer would then give a transcript of the questioning to Fontaine, who would send it together with “a certificate sealed with the seal of the Senior Courts” to Roberts’ attorneys.

    If Andrew refused or failed to show up for the interview, the law states that Roberts’ attorneys could apply for a court order instructing him to do so. Disobeying a court order in the UK may leave someone open to prosecution for contempt of court.

    The 1975 UK law that covers giving evidence to foreign courts indicates that Andrew – or any other Briton – could claim to be shielded from having to give evidence if “doing so would be prejudicial to the security of the United Kingdom”. The only evidence needed to prove this is “a certificate signed by or on behalf of” the relevant secretary of state in the British cabinet.

    “It is a cumbersome procedure and a very lengthy procedure, so we are obviously hoping to avoid that,” said Scarola. “It may or may not become necessary in the future.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...uestions-court

  16. #141
    Thailand Expat
    panama hat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Last Online
    21-10-2023 @ 08:08 AM
    Location
    Way, Way South of the border now - thank God!
    Posts
    32,680
    Quote Originally Posted by Klondyke View Post
    ^My dear friend asks me to go to Russia, painting me in red, for such link, he can read it also elsewhere...
    Yea . . . nah. (did it again! ) Sometimes you make very little sense, and then there's this . . .

  17. #142
    RIP
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    16,939
    New stories hitting the press about this old boy.. The favourite uncle to Prince Charles..
    The uncle who introduced his very good friend Jimmy
    Savile to the royals.... Not new stories to some of us...

    Mountbatten, Savile, Ted Heath, Prince Andrew, Epstein... Join the dots...
    History will show the ammount of deviants connected to the royals..
    God save the Queen??? God save us all from the devils spawn..



    I read somewhere that the whole "IRA assassination" was a cover story... he was taken out by very different people as he was some sort of liability

  18. #143
    Hangin' Around cyrille's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    Home
    Posts
    33,443
    Quote Originally Posted by Chittychangchang View Post
    I read somewhere...
    ...this always precedes a pile of utter horseshit from you, eh?

    'Metro' again?

    Mountbatten had nothing to do with introducing Prince Charles to Saville. They knew each other thanks to their selfless charity work.
    Last edited by cyrille; 01-12-2019 at 08:54 AM.

  19. #144
    Thailand Expat
    katie23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    PI
    Posts
    6,558
    Lord Mountbatten.. Hmm... Now being played by the actor who played Tywin Lannister in GOT of The Crown, season 3.

    I've watched S1 & S2 of The Crown. Now in the middle of S3. Seems like Mountbatten & the Queen Mother were the cause of separation of Charles & Camilla when they were young.

    But yeah, re: Andy, I've watched a part of his BBC interview - very awkward & dodgy.

    Saville, Epstein, Andy - they were all dodgy. But then protected by the higher ups. Re: Epstein, did he take his own life or was he silenced? I guess we'll never know. Re: Andy, it's unfair, but that's life... Sigh..

  20. #145
    Hangin' Around cyrille's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    Home
    Posts
    33,443
    Quote Originally Posted by katie23 View Post
    Lord Mountbatten.. Hmm... Now being played by the actor who played Tywin Lannister in GOT
    He has fantasy fiction credentials, then.

  21. #146
    Thailand Expat jabir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    12,009
    Quote Originally Posted by katie23 View Post
    ...Saville, Epstein, Andy - they were all dodgy. But then protected by the higher ups. Re: Epstein, did he take his own life or was he silenced? I guess we'll never know. Re: Andy, it's unfair, but that's life... Sigh..
    I suspect we'll know if he did, and left to speculate if he didn't.

  22. #147
    Thailand Expat prawnograph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    7th Military Circle
    Posts
    2,919
    Prince Andrew must 'call the FBI' about Jeffrey Epstein, London bus sign says
    “If you see this man please ask him to call the FBI to answer their questions," the sign said.


    A yellow school bus with a message for the Britain's Prince Andrew, from US lawyer Gloria Allred, drives along The Mall towards Buckingham Palace in London on Feb. 21, 2020

    Feb. 22, 2020

    LONDON — A school bus has been spotted driving around London with two large pictures of Britain’s Prince Andrew on the side and a message telling people who see him to “ask him to call the FBI.”

    The bus was driven past Buckingham Palace and through the upmarket Mayfair neighborhood in the center of the United Kingdom’s capital.

    It also featured the website address for the high-profile U.S. attorney Gloria Allred, who represents a number of victims of the disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein.

    In an email to NBC News, Allred confirmed she was behind the sign.

  23. #148
    knows
    hallelujah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Last Online
    Today @ 02:51 AM
    Posts
    13,443
    Quote Originally Posted by cyrille View Post
    ...this always precedes a pile of utter horseshit from you, eh?

    'Metro' again?
    As revealed on the football threads, Chitty is a Daily Hate reader.

    No surprise really.

  24. #149
    En route
    Cujo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Last Online
    24-02-2024 @ 04:47 PM
    Location
    Reality.
    Posts
    32,939

    Prince Andrew won't voluntarily cooperate in Epstein inquiry, prosecutor says

    Prince Andrew won't voluntarily cooperate in Epstein inquiry, prosecutor says
    Despite public offer to help with investigation Andrew has ‘completely shut the door’, and New York attorney general is now considering other options
    Prince Andrew has “completely shut the door” on cooperating with US investigators in the Jeffrey Epstein case and they are now “considering” further options, a New York prosecutor said on Monday.


    Andrew was a friend of Epstein, the wealthy financier and convicted sex offender whose death in custody while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges in New York last year was ruled a suicide.


    Andrew denies all claims of sexual misconduct relating to the Epstein case but has stepped back from public duties as a result of his connection to it.


    Speaking to reporters on Monday, the Manhattan US attorney Geoffrey Berman said: “Contrary to Prince Andrew’s very public offer to cooperate with our investigation into Epstein’s co-conspirators, an offer that was conveyed via press release, Prince Andrew has now completely shut the door on voluntary cooperation and our office is considering its options.”


    In November, Andrew said he was “willing to help any appropriate law enforcement agency with their investigations if required”.


    Berman made a similar claim in January, which former sex crimes prosecutors told the Guardian was most likely a move designed to win political support for the investigation.




    Prince Andrew and Jeffrey Epstein: what you need to know
    Read more
    Buckingham Palace said then it would not comment and the matter was being dealt with by the prince’s legal team. Contacted on Monday, a Palace spokeswoman said: “The issue is being dealt with by the Duke of York’s legal team.”


    Buckingham Palace has consistently refused to reveal any details of Andrew’s legal team but the Duke has reportedly hired Clare Montgomery, a senior barrister at Matrix Chambers, whose clients have included Augusto Pinochet, Chile’s former dictator, and Shrien Dewani, charged with and acquitted of murdering his wife in South Africa. She also prosecuted the Metropolitan police over the death of Jean Charles de Menezes, shot dead in a failed anti-terror operation.


    Andrew has been accused of having sex with a young woman provided by Epstein, a claim he categorically denies.


    In a December interview with the BBC, the accuser, Virginia Giuffre, now 35, called Andrew’s denial “BS”.


    “He knows what happened,” she said. “I know what happened, and there’s only one of us telling the truth, and I know that’s me.”


    The Guardian has reported that according to flight logs, Andrew was among nine people on Epstein’s plane for a trip from the US Virgin Islands to Florida in February 1999.


    A lawsuit filed by the US territory’s attorney general in January cites new evidence that Epstein “held captive underage girls” there as recently as 2018.


    Montgomery declined to comment to an inquiry from the Guardian. She is reportedly briefed by Gary Bloxsome, a criminal defence solicitor who has defended British troops against war crime allegations. It has been reported he was appointed directly by Andrew, though this has not been confirmed by the palace.

    Prince Andrew won't voluntarily cooperate in Epstein inquiry, prosecutor says | UK news | The Guardian

  25. #150
    Thailand Expat jabir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    12,009
    I'm sure there's a ticking timebomb with this lad's name on it, and that he goes to bed each night thanking christ for not springing it that day.

Page 6 of 12 FirstFirst 123456789101112 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •