Charles may pay for Andrew's security

Yes, Callistemon21, but I don’t know him. I know some people who know him-one of them is a nephew, but I don’t know him so anything I know is hearsay.

So, Purplepixie you know PA is arrogant. I don’t know him well enough to make any judgement that isn’t based on hearsay.
I know three people who were in the RN with him and his reputation would suggest he is arrogant.

Mollygo So, Purplepixie you know PA is arrogant. I don’t know him well enough to make any judgement that isn’t based on hearsay.

I've never been in the same space with him, I have no idea to his "arrogant" personality, other than what people suppose on MN.

What PA and his brother choose to do, now, is their business.

It appears the royal family have a fairly adept PR team re-making family member images as needed, PA may be next?

So, Purplepixie you know PA is arrogant. I don’t know him well enough to make any judgement that isn’t based on hearsay.
JaneJudge, you think he should get a job to pay for his security.
I’m interested. What sort of job would you recommend that would pay enough for him to pay for his security, whilst not involving payment for his protection whilst he was doing the job.
I’m not condoning what he was accused of doing, just, having read comments on here I’m not sure what you see as safe employment.
My DH said PA could probably earn a fortune doing after-dinner speeches same as BJ, but even he admits that if even GN’s are as violent as some suggestions suggest, there are those who might use those events to attack PA, thus needing some of funds raised to pay for added . . . security.

JaneJudge

paddyann54

I'm sorry but if my son had been friends with the likes of Epstein and Murdoch for decades ,stayed at their homes when there were young ...yes underage in those places...girls regularly there theres no way I would beieve he didn't know what was happening .Especially if even one of those girls turned up in the UK at a "party" .
The apologists for Andrew on here are in essence the same as the folk who thought that 13 year old girls were "prositutes" not abused girls .Would you be as inderstanding if one of your family was involved in trafficking of young people .
It beggars belief that there are women who think like this in the 21st century ,this blinkered attitude is disgusting

you are spot on

there is some deep rooted misogyny in our society and threads like this just highlight how bad it is.

a lot of very wealthy people pay for their own security. Maybe he ought to get a job and pay for his own too

I agree with both of you.

However, if my brother's life was threatened (and we don't know but it is possible that some may worry he could speak out and point the finger at them) then I could not know about that possibility and do nothing. It would prey on my conscience if anything were to happen to him.

'I deplore what you have done but you're my brother and I still love you.'

Its his brother so it is up to him to help him out otherwise we might have to pay up for him. I really do not like Andrew and never had - such an arrogant a***!

paddyann54

I'm sorry but if my son had been friends with the likes of Epstein and Murdoch for decades ,stayed at their homes when there were young ...yes underage in those places...girls regularly there theres no way I would beieve he didn't know what was happening .Especially if even one of those girls turned up in the UK at a "party" .
The apologists for Andrew on here are in essence the same as the folk who thought that 13 year old girls were "prositutes" not abused girls .Would you be as inderstanding if one of your family was involved in trafficking of young people .
It beggars belief that there are women who think like this in the 21st century ,this blinkered attitude is disgusting

you are spot on

there is some deep rooted misogyny in our society and threads like this just highlight how bad it is.

a lot of very wealthy people pay for their own security. Maybe he ought to get a job and pay for his own too

M0nica

So many families end up estranged for what seem to be the slimmest of reasons, there will always be those who cannot understand that other families are not as fragile as theirs.

I can only assume you have no professional or personal experience of the devastation caused MOnica.

I'm sorry but if my son had been friends with the likes of Epstein and Murdoch for decades ,stayed at their homes when there were young ...yes underage in those places...girls regularly there theres no way I would beieve he didn't know what was happening .Especially if even one of those girls turned up in the UK at a "party" .
The apologists for Andrew on here are in essence the same as the folk who thought that 13 year old girls were "prositutes" not abused girls .Would you be as inderstanding if one of your family was involved in trafficking of young people .
It beggars belief that there are women who think like this in the 21st century ,this blinkered attitude is disgusting

So many families end up estranged for what seem to be the slimmest of reasons, there will always be those who cannot understand that other families are not as fragile as theirs.

I’ve no problem with PA getting security, even if paid for by the public purse. Things may change as King Charles slims down the monarchy but Given PA (and Harry) served in our military, fought in wars as well as being members of the RF I believe they’re in greater need of protection thanI am.

I see no reason for PA to be cut off by his family, but it’s right that he’s cut off from being an active working member of the RF/acting on behalf of the monarchy

I understand and respect posters who say they can’t imagine ever cutting a family member out, estranging them. I understand why that is said. In some situations though it happens and for good reason. Devastating, heart breaking but the point of no return can be reached

Norah

Caleo

Charles is a nice man and his niceness is not a PR effort but is genuine. The more I hear about him the more he appears to be a nice human being.

Back to he loves his brother and is perhaps (who actually knows? not GN) planning to pay for his brothers security.

People never give up on those they truly love, in my opinion.

I can't imagine giving up on my son, whatever he did. I would condemn any behaviour remotely similar to PA's, but I wouldn't/couldn't stop loving him. It's what mothers do, and maybe brothers, too.

I have spoken of this several times , those who can recall the horrors of the Dennis Nielsen case, his mother was asked why she traveled from Scotland every month to visit him , her reply
-he’s my son, so many mothers will understand her , same surely applies to siblings.

VioletSky

Oh yay

Undertones

VS are you saying that you would give up on a family member like PA?
Are those your undertones?

I think that's more than likely Norah. You don't need a vivid imagination to envisage the back lash if Charles wasn't footing the bill himself.

Oh yay

Undertones

Caleo

Charles is a nice man and his niceness is not a PR effort but is genuine. The more I hear about him the more he appears to be a nice human being.

Back to he loves his brother and is perhaps (who actually knows? not GN) planning to pay for his brothers security.

People never give up on those they truly love, in my opinion.

Yes I think so too Caleo and TBH he's rather grown on me.

Charles is a nice man and his niceness is not a PR effort but is genuine. The more I hear about him the more he appears to be a nice human being.

Yes I suppose so. Someone simply carrying a cricket bat isn't the same as someone brandishing one. It's an offence to carry a knife at all in the UK isn't it, regardless.

So a person displaying a weapon in a manner which appears threatening would be doing so with malicious intent.

The law doesn't work that way as we know Mollygo. The onus is on the prosecution to prove guilt beyond all reasonable doubt. It is not on the defence to prove innocence.

So in the case of someone carrying a knife for example, the prosecution would need to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the carrier was doing so with malicious intent.

Today 09:20 GrannyGravy13

Smileless2012
I agree M0nica PA is arrogant and stupid but being arrogant and stupid doesn't mean you're a sex offender, and saying so isn't defending him.

Neither is stating the fact that he has never been tried and convicted for the offence.
Totally agree.
Totally agree too.

I love this though from VS, slightly amended and especially if it applies to all weapons.
^ And yes sometimes you must prove innocence, for instance, if someone were proven to be carrying a weapon in a place where it should not be carried, then they would then need to prove they were carrying the weapon for an innocent reason.^

Besides

Innocent till proven guilty is within the court system, to prevent mistreatment.

It does not stop people being put in prison to await trial if they are deemed too dangerous to roam free.

It does not prevent a jury, judge or magistrates from convicting you whatever th balance of evidence.

And yes sometimes you must prove innocence, for instance, if someone were proven to be carrying a knife then they would then need to prove they were carrying a knife for an innocent reason.

And it really really does not stop trial by media and its not unlawful for anyone to say they believe someone guilty. The same way its not unlawful for anyone to say the things said on this thread about the potential victim.

So it's definitely not a get out of jail free card in discussion, so the discussion continues

It's been said a lot of times though hasn't it