Are they taking him to the Tower? Please let them be taking him to the Tower.
(I know they won’t actually be holding him in the Tower of London. Still, tradition!)
Thanks! My husband has been calling him “the Andrew formerly known as Prince”, but a shorter name is good.
I called him that last night when I was talking to someone else named Andrew. Great minds and all that.
I referred to him as that this very morning. It’s fun.
Ring! Ring!
Hello?
Do you have Prince Andrew in a can?
I suppose they’ve put him in the can now…
With a bit of luck he’ll incriminate some of the others - like “well I didn’t r*pe very many children and besides, everyone else was doing it”
Beatrice and Eugenie’s children: “Do you have Old Grand-Dad in a cooler?”
I was wondering a few weeks ago when this newly impoverished* man with a fund of potentially incriminating stories about a bunch of rich men would reach for the button marked “blackmail”. It seems like his moment for this has passed. However, the button marked “rat out your accomplices for a reduced sentence” is now flashing insistently.
*up to a point, Lord Copper
Finally, Andrews’ situation suites his eternally dour appearance.
In deference to the forum, a couple of more factual observations:
- If UK police want to interview you, they can do that without also arresting you. Arrest is usually the step prior to charging someone with a crime, so the fact that they haven’t just invited Mr Mountbatten-Windsor to attend an interview suggests they might be fairly confident they’ll be bringing charges.
- Following arrest, the police have a maximum of 96 hours to decide whether to charge a suspect with an offence, or to release pending further investigation (or to just release if the alibi turns out to be good etc.) Typically though, the decision is made within 24 hours as arrest is usually the last step in an investigation, not the first.
- Charging decisions are ultimately made by the Crown Prosecution Service. In straightforward cases this will be little more than signing off a police decision, at other times the CPS will be askd to take a lawyerly view of the weight of evidence vs the specific language of the statute and weigh in on whether there’s sufficient chance of a successful prosecution. The CPS have said they have not yet given advice in this instance.
- Regardless of all the above, UK courts take presumption of innocence very seriously, especially after someone has been charged, so worth pointing out that there is a considerable legal and practical gulf between “arrested” and “actually guilty”.
I wonder if someone reached out to Charles to let him know of their plan to arrest Andrew, or even to ask for his approval.
I’d say the first is a certainty so he wouldn’t get ambushed by a reporter asking for a comment. The second seems unlikely since it would trigger a parliamentary crisis.
The King has spoken:
Some question what at all he has, considering the Queen Mother passed all her estate to Betty (which meant no inheritance tax) and Betty left it all to Charles (again, if it goes to the monarch, no inheritance tax). He certainly wasn’t going to be kept in Rolls and horses with a navy pension alleged about £26,000.
I’m curious what evidence they have, considering very little of those charges regarding documents have been mentioned by those scouring the released files. I wonder if MI-whatever gets unredacted versions of relevant files?
I doubt the files are their evidence. There is probably another malefactor in UK custody cutting a deal.
I haven’t read every post in this thread, but in 2014, he purchased a Swiss chalet for 18 million pounds, though he later sold it to pay the settlement to Virginia Giuffre. In other words, he had some source of funds aside from his Navy pension.
He was upset about moving from a masion to a smaller mansion. How does the small mansion look now compared to a cell?
The law on contempt of court is also pretty strict on the risk of prejudicing a trial with prior discussion of evidence. But this much is public: