Looks like he has been a bit of a bad lad, has he actually broken the law. Or is it just bad for the royal family?
Looks like he has been a bit of a bad lad, has he actually broken the law. Or is it just bad for the royal family?
She has literally singled out loads and most are being kept hidden from the public. His name came out because of the photo being leaked. Interested to know what prime minister abused her though!Not defending him as he's undefendable but if this lass has been passed around in her teen years by these ****'s. how come the only one she's singling out is the rich guy who lived in a Palace?I
Or am I missing something here.?
In fairness mate she was a young lass passed around by very rich and powerful men.If as she says she was forced to have sex with him, I don’t understand why she went back 3 times?
Wasn’t a very good deal, was it?In reality there are two forms of 'guilty'.
There's guilty in law and guilty in my opinion.
The prosecution must prove their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt in law ...
... in my mind there is no doubt so he's guilty as far as I'm concerned..
It's beyond any reason that someone should give a total stranger £10million ...
... the King and the rest of the Royal Family clearly agree.
Wasn’t a very good deal, was it?
If I’d been Randy Andy I’d have told her to Feck Right AFF!!
Bart
I know he’s a peedo but there was no need to get into dialogue with her IMO.He's not randy, he's a peedophile ...
..he paid up to avoid criminal charges, you'd have done the same.






Tax payers money ultimately. Why build hospitals and schools when you can fund a family to get up to all sorts of antics and pay people off to keep it quiet. Certainly tarnished the Queens name (not the new adulteress one).mammy paid up to shut the lassie up...unfortunately she decided to do a 'full write up' adding many more names (apparently) and those names want the story out as much as andy does.
they can no longer touch her so my thoughts are that plenty of millions will be floating into plenty of bank accounts soon or maybe a few 'strange deaths'...i would also take a wild guess at a few world leaders want it kept quiet.
Looks like he has been a bit of a bad lad, has he actually broken the law. Or is it just bad for the royal family?
Historically the Royal family have produced a net positive economic benefit of well over £1bn pa. They get taxpayer money to carry out their duties. The same duties which result in significant economic value. The profita from the crown estate go back to the public purse.Tax payers money ultimately. Why build hospitals and schools when you can fund a family to get up to all sorts of antics and pay people off to keep it quiet. Certainly tarnished the Queens name (not the new adulteress one).
No chip on the shoulder here but as a general point plenty visit Versailles without the expectation of meeting a royal. The way that family treat their workers says a lot. Looks an interesting read the Fall of the Yorks.Historically the Royal family have produced a net positive economic benefit of well over £1bn pa. They get taxpayer money to carry out their duties. The same duties which result in significant economic value. The profita from the crown estate go back to the public purse.
The net contribution has lessened in recent years. But they are still net wealth creators for the country. Our King is slimming down the royal family cost of operations to respond to this downturn.
Purely from an economic standpoint I have no idea why folk would criticise the royal family. Too many in this country seem to have a chip on their shoulder about wealthy folk, when in reality many of them create wealth for the economy as a whole. Good luck to us once we have driven every last one to other countries.
Going on my lifetime observation, very high percentage of anti royal sentiment is down to religious upbringing,which is probably plausible reallyHistorically the Royal family have produced a net positive economic benefit of well over £1bn pa. They get taxpayer money to carry out their duties. The same duties which result in significant economic value. The profita from the crown estate go back to the public purse.
The net contribution has lessened in recent years. But they are still net wealth creators for the country. Our King is slimming down the royal family cost of operations to respond to this downturn.
Purely from an economic standpoint I have no idea why folk would criticise the royal family. Too many in this country seem to have a chip on their shoulder about wealthy folk, when in reality many of them create wealth for the economy as a whole. Good luck to us once we have driven every last one to other countries.