Jeffrey Epstein and Prince Andrew

World news discussion forum
User avatar
tamada
udonmap.com
Posts: 4317
Joined: February 21, 2007, 4:03 am
Location: down two... then left

Re: Jeffrey Epstein and Prince Andrew

Post by tamada » December 7, 2019, 12:02 am

Old Grumpy wrote:
December 6, 2019, 11:47 am
stattointhailand wrote:
December 5, 2019, 7:11 pm
I think that the tapes and files that Epstein kept (a copy of which are currently in Russia) could tend to prove his guilt/innocence once and for all. Unfortunately for the general public and fortunate for Andy & Ghislaine they also contain incriminating evidence about dozens/hundreds of others who will cover for each other (even murder to stop the details coming out). Anyone who thinks it is 'normal" that Epsteins cellmate was removed the day before he committed "suicide" both guards failed to do THREE rounds of the cells, nobody watching CCTV in the security room questioned that they had not made their rounds, both guards mysteriously fell asleep at the same time, the CCTV camera concerned failed at exactly the time he committed "suicide", he had 3 broken bones in his neck, which an independent coroner said he had never found in ANY of the hanging suicides he had ever attended. Funnily enough the DNA tests done on the tied together pieces of sheet that was used have not been made public, nor have the DNA tests done on the substances (skin?) under Epsteins finger nails. BTW they have at least TWO witnesses who were present during Andy's party orgies and are willing to testify that he knowingly had sex with 14 year olds
I suppose that's what yer get when the masonic handshakes start to get banded about :roll:
You seem to have a lot of info that isn't in the public domain Statts perhaps you could enlighten us all to your source or do you have an , as yet unrevealed connection to all the debauchery that has apparently been tasking place? :-"
There's a lot of unsubstantiated and speculative stuff that is in the public domain.

But I do like the Palace Ninja alternative fact.



User avatar
GT93
udonmap.com
Posts: 5447
Joined: June 5, 2009, 9:37 am
Location: ฃอยชอบ Auckland

Re: Jeffrey Epstein and Prince Andrew

Post by GT93 » December 7, 2019, 3:38 pm

On youtube Shaun Attwood is posting good videos about Prince Andrew just about every day:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ukVS_VrcFfA

User avatar
tamada
udonmap.com
Posts: 4317
Joined: February 21, 2007, 4:03 am
Location: down two... then left

Re: Jeffrey Epstein and Prince Andrew

Post by tamada » December 7, 2019, 8:20 pm

The comedians are having a field day too



Kevin Bridges just 'trying out material for the Royal variety performance'...

User avatar
tamada
udonmap.com
Posts: 4317
Joined: February 21, 2007, 4:03 am
Location: down two... then left

Re: Jeffrey Epstein and Prince Andrew

Post by tamada » January 28, 2020, 7:13 am

So, on the west side of the Atlantic, we have Anne Sacoolas who is being uncooperative regarding her part in the death of a young English lad. Meanwhile, on this side of the pond, we have Prince Andrew being reported by the US authorities as being totally uncooperative with regard to their Epstein investigation.

Maybe they need Noel Edmonds to work on this horse trade?

User avatar
stattointhailand
udonmap.com
Posts: 11859
Joined: October 25, 2007, 11:34 pm
Location: Oiling the locks on my gun case

Re: Jeffrey Epstein and Prince Andrew

Post by stattointhailand » January 28, 2020, 1:17 pm

One things or sure Jims not gonna do any more royal fix its

User avatar
Khun Paul
udonmap.com
Posts: 3840
Joined: September 16, 2008, 3:28 pm
Location: Udon Thani

Re: Jeffrey Epstein and Prince Andrew

Post by Khun Paul » January 28, 2020, 5:27 pm

As I see it and to quote POTUS Quid Pro Quo, that woman comes back Prince Andrew will talk, The American is NOT above the law either . Put that in your pipe and smoke it Americans

Kenr6583
udonmap.com
Posts: 475
Joined: July 13, 2019, 2:15 pm

Re: Jeffrey Epstein and Prince Andrew

Post by Kenr6583 » January 28, 2020, 7:45 pm

Khun Paul wrote:
January 28, 2020, 5:27 pm
As I see it and to quote POTUS Quid Pro Quo, that woman comes back Prince Andrew will talk, The American is NOT above the law either . Put that in your pipe and smoke it Americans
Don't lump everyone in the same basket KP. Me personally, I do not believe that woman should have been able to claim diplomatic immunity under that situation.

jackspratt
udonmap.com
Posts: 10864
Joined: July 2, 2006, 5:29 pm

Re: Jeffrey Epstein and Prince Andrew

Post by jackspratt » January 28, 2020, 8:06 pm

Kenr6583 wrote:
January 28, 2020, 7:45 pm
Khun Paul wrote:
January 28, 2020, 5:27 pm
As I see it and to quote POTUS Quid Pro Quo, that woman comes back Prince Andrew will talk, The American is NOT above the law either . Put that in your pipe and smoke it Americans
Don't lump everyone in the same basket KP. Me personally, I do not believe that woman should have been able to claim diplomatic immunity under that situation.
Particularly as her husband is not a diplomat. He is a technician in an eavesdropping spy ring.

Kenr6583
udonmap.com
Posts: 475
Joined: July 13, 2019, 2:15 pm

Re: Jeffrey Epstein and Prince Andrew

Post by Kenr6583 » February 1, 2020, 4:26 am

jackspratt wrote:
January 28, 2020, 8:06 pm
Kenr6583 wrote:
January 28, 2020, 7:45 pm
Khun Paul wrote:
January 28, 2020, 5:27 pm
As I see it and to quote POTUS Quid Pro Quo, that woman comes back Prince Andrew will talk, The American is NOT above the law either . Put that in your pipe and smoke it Americans
Don't lump everyone in the same basket KP. Me personally, I do not believe that woman should have been able to claim diplomatic immunity under that situation.
Particularly as her husband is not a diplomat. He is a technician in an eavesdropping spy ring.
Exactly. He was never registered as a diplomat at the time of the accident.

User avatar
Khun Paul
udonmap.com
Posts: 3840
Joined: September 16, 2008, 3:28 pm
Location: Udon Thani

Re: Jeffrey Epstein and Prince Andrew

Post by Khun Paul » February 1, 2020, 5:29 am

I agree and in any case in looking at the FACTS, not the hearsay evidence or even gut feeling.
The lady from the USA did commit an offence which if proven could serve a term of imprisonment. Prince Andrew, is purely a possible witness to Criminal offences, evidence could be obtained following an interview. However as yet NO LAW in the USA or even the UK can compel a witness or otherwise to speak to Law enforcement if they do not wish to. If HRH does not wish to speak , he will not , however the American woman can be arrested lawfully .

Kenr6583
udonmap.com
Posts: 475
Joined: July 13, 2019, 2:15 pm

Re: Jeffrey Epstein and Prince Andrew

Post by Kenr6583 » February 1, 2020, 6:57 am

I'm not sure how factual this is or not, but I read that given the fact that she left the UK and returned to her home country, she is no longer protected under diplomatic immunity and the parents of this victim can take civil action against her. I know it's not about the money for these parents, but if they could find a lawyer to work pro bono on this until something can be resolved, I would attempt to take her and her husband for everything they are worth, and then some.

User avatar
tamada
udonmap.com
Posts: 4317
Joined: February 21, 2007, 4:03 am
Location: down two... then left

Re: Jeffrey Epstein and Prince Andrew

Post by tamada » February 1, 2020, 10:55 pm

Kenr6583 wrote:
February 1, 2020, 4:26 am

Exactly. He was never registered as a diplomat at the time of the accident.
Citation needed. If it's a case that his assignment was quite recent and the application for diplomatic recognition hadn't been fully promulgated, that may be the stuff for lawyers to argue but I would think he (and his dependents) would be legally proven to have had diplomatic immunity as soon as they cleared UK immigration from air-side.

My understanding is that both the foreign spooks AND any dependents that moved here with them are covered by diplomatic immunity. However, after a review quite a while ago, the UK and US agreed that in the case of a locally punishable offense, which included serious driving offenses, being committed by the spook, ie.the principal in the case of a family assignment, then the immunity would be waived and the offender could be arrested and be answerable to the British judicial system. However, for some reason this conditioned waiver was never extended to the dependents, hence the lady in question had full diplomatic immunity and exercised her right to leave.

Instead of leaving via (say) Heathrow and a commercial flight, the US authorities chose to fly her out direct from the air base on a US military aircraft. In a similar way as to what point her diplomatic immunity precisely commenced on arrival in the UK, this was to ensure she could not be arrested air-side. Legally, after clearing UK immigration, her diplomatic protections would be non-existent. To avoid the possibility of a totally legal arrest by Northants police as she sat on the tarmac in a commercial jet, she left from a US base on a US military aircraft so that her diplomatic protections were in place all the way until the US aircraft left UK airspace.

Should have scrambled some Typhoons from Coningsby and shot the b!tch down.

User avatar
Khun Paul
udonmap.com
Posts: 3840
Joined: September 16, 2008, 3:28 pm
Location: Udon Thani

Re: Jeffrey Epstein and Prince Andrew

Post by Khun Paul » February 2, 2020, 6:18 am

The whole matter is now rather pointless, She is there and certainly NOT returning, showing that the USA is thumbing its nose at the UK . He is not talking and no law can make him.

Conversation has ended !

jackspratt
udonmap.com
Posts: 10864
Joined: July 2, 2006, 5:29 pm

Re: Jeffrey Epstein and Prince Andrew

Post by jackspratt » February 9, 2020, 9:00 pm

tamada wrote:
January 28, 2020, 7:13 am
So, on the west side of the Atlantic, we have Anne Sacoolas who is being uncooperative regarding her part in the death of a young English lad.
This report, if correct, may explain a lot about the sudden uplift of Mrs Sacoolas after her criminal act in the UK.
The UK government has declined to comment on reports that Anne Sacoolas, the US diplomat’s wife charged with causing the death of a British teenager in a road crash, could have received extra protection because she was a senior CIA officer.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/202 ... harry-dunn

User avatar
stattointhailand
udonmap.com
Posts: 11859
Joined: October 25, 2007, 11:34 pm
Location: Oiling the locks on my gun case

Re: Jeffrey Epstein and Prince Andrew

Post by stattointhailand » February 9, 2020, 9:14 pm

Our Prince TRUMPS your cia officer

User avatar
tamada
udonmap.com
Posts: 4317
Joined: February 21, 2007, 4:03 am
Location: down two... then left

Re: Jeffrey Epstein and Prince Andrew

Post by tamada » February 10, 2020, 8:04 am

jackspratt wrote:
February 9, 2020, 9:00 pm
tamada wrote:
January 28, 2020, 7:13 am
So, on the west side of the Atlantic, we have Anne Sacoolas who is being uncooperative regarding her part in the death of a young English lad.
This report, if correct, may explain a lot about the sudden uplift of Mrs Sacoolas after her criminal act in the UK.
The UK government has declined to comment on reports that Anne Sacoolas, the US diplomat’s wife charged with causing the death of a British teenager in a road crash, could have received extra protection because she was a senior CIA officer.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/202 ... harry-dunn
I am not much into messenger shooting but that Guardian article relies heavily on the cutting-edge journalism of the Sunday Mail so even giving it red herring status would be being generous. More like old kipper maybe? The Daily Mail article (I will let you get your own link) suggests in true black hat drama style, "However, a security source told the Mail: ‘You never really leave the CIA'"

It doesn't matter if she was a bigger spook than her hubby, because she was classified as a dependent of her spook hubby who was on active duty, she had the protections of the nuanced diplomatic immunity as I pointed out earlier.

Reading the article I observe the following,

"Adam Wagner, one of the lawyers acting for the Dunn family, said the FCO needed “to answer whether it knew Sacoolas was CIA at the time of Harry’s death, and whether the US used her status as a family member to take advantage of the ‘anomaly’ whereby family members are said to have more immunity than diplomats at the base”. The Dunn lawyers dispute the existence of this claimed anomaly."

Once they stop listening to human rights lawyers who call these mutually agreed diplomatic protections an 'anomaly' and restrain themselves from this 'senior CIA operative possibly working deep cover' wild goose chase, they can focus on less straw clutching ways of getting justice done for Harry.

Post Reply

Return to “World News”