The Royal Mega Thread, Part II

[no1novice]

Sept 15, 2022 18:19:31 GMT Sarzy said:

Sept 15, 2022 17:39:52 GMT chaz said:

People aren't usually jailed for sex with a 17 year old tho. He's a "sick old man" to quote the heckler, but not a predator.

They are (or should be) if they rape them/take part in abusing sex trafficking victims though. Virginia says she was forced to have sex with him. 

It depends. If he "just" has sex with a trafficked person, over the age of consent the only thing that he could have been criminally guilty of is "buying" sex but he didn't pay for it
If she was coherced then the person that coherced her (Epstein/Maxwell) is guilty.
And if trafficked, the trafficker (Epstein/Maxwell) is guilty.

You see this sort of thing (or you used to) when the police "cleaned up" red light areas. The women got charged, court & convicted & the Johns were sent home to their wifeys.

[sputnik]

all those people standing in line to see the queen, are they all wearing diapers? what do they do if they want to pee???

[dowcat]

Remembering Princess Grace: Monaco's royal family share a stunning collection of photos to mark the 40th anniversary of the Hollywood star's death

• Princess Monaco was otherwise known as American actress Grace Kelly, who starred in many Hollywood films
• She retired from acting aged 26 to marry Prince Rainier III in April 1956 - becoming Princess of Monaco
• Now 40 years on from her untimely death in 1982, new photographs have been shared of the princess
  

Grace Kelly married Prince Rainier III in April 1956 at the Saint Nicholas Cathedral in Monaco. The groom was the sovereign prince of the Principality of Monaco



The couple went on to have three children, pictured from left to right, baby Princess Stéphanie, Princess Caroline and Prince Albert



Although Grace Kelly left her acting career behind, she did continue with charity work, which often revolved around her love of children



The star (pictured here holding a camera) while her eldest daughter Princess Caroline looks on



Another black and white shot of the star at Easter. Colour photography only became common in the 1970s



The princess pictured looking relaxed with a dog, while wearing large Hollywood-style sunglasses



The Hollywood star, pictured on her wedding day, had no apparent difficulty giving up her acting career




Grace Kelly (pictured) towards the end of her life, photographed in a floor-length floral dress



Princess Caroline pictured with Prince Rainier, Princess Grace, Prince Albert II and Princess Stephanie, taken in 1974

www.dailymail.co.uk/

[chaz]

Sept 15, 2022 20:40:20 GMT no1novice said:

Sept 15, 2022 18:19:31 GMT Sarzy said:

They are (or should be) if they rape them/take part in abusing sex trafficking victims though. Virginia says she was forced to have sex with him. 

It depends. If he "just" has sex with a trafficked person, over the age of consent the only thing that he could have been criminally guilty of is "buying" sex but he didn't pay for it
If she was coherced then the person that coherced her (Epstein/Maxwell) is guilty.
And if trafficked, the trafficker (Epstein/Maxwell) is guilty.

You see this sort of thing (or you used to) when the police "cleaned up" red light areas. The women got charged, court & convicted & the Johns were sent home to their wifeys.

Exactly. Andrew didnt traffic or pay so he hasnt done anything wrong and certainly not legally. Only morally. He's not responsible for the crimes committed by epstein and giselle.

[sputnik]

i think he had sex with giuffre on several occasions, and in different places, and possibly in places where she was below the age of consent. either way, i think that should have been settled in court, and if i recall correctly he said he would avail himself to the FBI for questioning, and defend himself in court, but instead he chose to pay her off, you know like a totally innocent person... and that's assuming giuffre is the only one of epstein's girls (some of whom were much younger than 17) he slept with, and i highly doubt that... 

[Sarzy]

Sept 15, 2022 20:44:41 GMT sputnik said:

all those people standing in line to see the queen, are they all wearing diapers? what do they do if they want to pee???

I wondered that too. This is what it said on the Evening Standard site: 


Metropolitan Police officers will be joined by volunteers and stewards, while toilets and water fountains will also be provided along the route.

A wristband system will be used to manage the queue, with those waiting in line given a coloured and numbered wristband which organisers said would be specific to each person and “strictly non-transferable”.

“Your wristband also allows you to leave the queue for a short period to use a toilet or get refreshments,” according to the official guidance.

[czb]

'only morally'. 

this is the first time i've seen/heard someone try to defend sleazy andrew.

[greysfang]

Sept 15, 2022 21:56:08 GMT chaz said:

Sept 15, 2022 20:40:20 GMT no1novice said:

It depends. If he "just" has sex with a trafficked person, over the age of consent the only thing that he could have been criminally guilty of is "buying" sex but he didn't pay for it
If she was coherced then the person that coherced her (Epstein/Maxwell) is guilty.
And if trafficked, the trafficker (Epstein/Maxwell) is guilty.

You see this sort of thing (or you used to) when the police "cleaned up" red light areas. The women got charged, court & convicted & the Johns were sent home to their wifeys.

Exactly. Andrew didnt traffic or pay so he hasnt done anything wrong and certainly not legally. Only morally. He's not responsible for the crimes committed by epstein and giselle.

You can’t be fucking serious.

[firebrat1229]

Seriously - I hope we're being punk'd because I don't think I've ever seen anyone defend this pond-scum.

[sleuth]

If true about Meghan and Harry planning their own walkabout, I think William just saved them from further ridicule. Also has anyone else seen the video of Meghan being snotty to the aid who tried to take the flowers from her? It was only on the second attempt with a second aid where Harry had to intervene to tell her to hand over the flowers.. its pretty funny. She looks annoyed. It’s done for safety reasons but Meghan doesn’t like to listen to anyone.

[no1novice]

Sept 15, 2022 21:58:46 GMT sputnik said:

i think he had sex with giuffre on several occasions, and in different places, and possibly in places where she was below the age of consent. either way, i think that should have been settled in court, and if i recall correctly he said he would avail himself to the FBI for questioning, and defend himself in court, but instead he chose to pay her off, you know like a totally innocent person... and that's assuming giuffre is the only one of epstein's girls (some of whom were much younger than 17) he slept with, and i highly doubt that... 

Yep totally agree.





I should have added a caviot to my post that it only applies to UK law.

[czb]

Sept 15, 2022 23:31:49 GMT sleuth said:

If true about Meghan and Harry planning their own walkabout, I think William just saved them from further ridicule. Also has anyone else seen the video of Meghan being snotty to the aid who tried to take the flowers from her? It was only on the second attempt with a second aid where Harry had to intervene to tell her to hand over the flowers.. its pretty funny. She looks annoyed. It’s done for safety reasons but Meghan doesn’t like to listen to anyone.

1. re: walkabout. or william didn't want to be upstaged by harry and meghan. *shrugs*

2. re: the aide. i didn't see the big deal or that she looked snotty/annoyed.

[cornflakegrl]

It wasn't the time for anyone to try upstaging anyone.

That includes our couple of perpetual victimhood.

[sputnik]

how was she being snotty to the aid? she even said thank you and that she appreciated it.

metro.co.uk/video/duchess-sussex-tells-aide-flowers-now-2772421/?ito=vjs-link

[kittylady]

sputnik 

Last Thursday, the perennially young Queen Elizabeth II died at age 96, meaning that per the unbending rules of British succession, “her eldest son, Charles” — as Kenyan news station NTV reported at the time — “automatically becomes queen.”

They aren't really that unbending because the rules around succession were changed in 2013 so that the first born of a monarch or heir apparent would automatically ascend to the throne in due course, regardless of whether the offspring was a male or female. Charles is the eldest anyway but in Bill and Kathy's case if George had been a Georgina then she would have, in time, become Queen.

Rudeness exhibit A: Saturday’s accession ceremony, which saw our freshly confirmed replacement queen sign various official orders in front of the cameras. The photo op furnished acutely off-putting footage of His Maj trussed up in tails and hissing at palace aides who failed to move a pen tray off his table with due haste. A decidedly unflattering look, and as the New York Post — a typically pro-royal publication — pointed out, this was only the first of two pen-based “tantrums” Charles would have in three days. On Tuesday, he reportedly “stormed out” of a signing ceremony in Northern Ireland after a pen leaked ink on him.

He didn't storm out. The pen leaked, Camilla calmly stepped in (I know that move very well, except with car keys lol), and had it changed for one that wasn't leaking, he signed and exited, albeit hastily and testily and wiping ink off his hands, while Camilla took the seat to sign her part and keep things jogging along.  This is one time where I'd cut him some slack though. His mother had just died fairly unexpectedly, and he'd been on official engagement after official engagement since, with very little time to actually begin to grieve.  He certainly did better than me - with my temper I'd probably have flipped the table.

Bratty, but then there is Rudeness exhibit B, the exhibit that really sealed the deal for me personally: the Guardian’s report that the king’s top aide, Sir Clive Alderton, notified as many as 100 of Charles’s Clarence House employees of impending layoffs during a memorial service for the queen. “Everybody is absolutely livid, including private secretaries and the senior team,” one source told the Guardian. “All the staff have been working late every night since Thursday, to be met with this. People were visibly shaken by it.” Presumably Charles’s staffing needs will change somewhat when he moves to Buckingham Palace, but many of his employees apparently thought they would be going with him. Maybe you are saying that it’s unrealistic to expect the royal household to avoid turnover at this time, but the royal household is also notorious for grossly underpaying its staff and for a chronic inability to approach sensitive situations — the loss of a long-held job requiring a niche set of skills at a keenly stressful moment, in this case — with anything like sensitivity

The potential for layoffs won't be a surprise to most of the staff as apparently there is a clause their contracts that upon the death of the monarch there will be a period of six months of job security for both the previous and ascending households after which the new monarch will choose his or her own people. I think that those who DO find themselves ousted will be ok for work simply because having held a position for the Queen/new King will open a great many doors for them, both within British aristocracy and wealthy foreign households in the UK and abroad. And everyone knows that the Royals pay shitty wages but many of the positions are offset by accommodation as well as the kudos of being there and people still flock to do the jobs. Why do they think that even someone like slimy Andrew and his creepy bear collection still have long term staff and no shortage of applicants when a position comes available? (And I think it was probably Andrew who made the alleged racist remark).