Prince Andrew ‘immune’ to US trial, Buckingham Palace rejects sex abuse claims

Prince Andrew ‘immune’ to US trial, Buckingham Palace rejects sex abuse claims

Posted by talesfromthelou on January 5, 2015
Posted in: Britain, Conspiracy theory, Crime, Criminology, Elites, Hypocrisy, ljf, Mass media, Parasites, Political science, Politics, Psychopathology, Sex. Leave a comment
Of course they would deny it. Must be nice to have a world class public relations firm do your talking, eh Andrew?
You know what? I don’t even care if he is guilty or not. Although I am inclined to believe the woman who made the accusations. The fact that he is hiding under his mother’s skirt says it all. The parasitic elites have gotten away with murder for way too long. Come on Andrew, be a man and come face the music!
Prince Andrew ‘immune’ to US trial, Buckingham Palace rejects sex abuse claims — RT UK.
RT News
January 05, 2015

Britain’s Prince Andrew (AFP/DPA)
 
Buckingham Palace has been forced to defend Prince Andrew over sex abuse allegations as news outlets revealed a secret deal allegedly designed to protect the fifth in line to the UK throne from prosecution in the US.
 


The Duke of York returned to the UK from the Swiss ski resort Verbier on Sunday amid allegations he had had sexual relations with a teenage American girl, named Sunday as 30-year-old Virginia Roberts, when she was under the legal age of consent.
Roberts told a court in Florida she was forced to have sex with Prince Andrew multiple times by disgraced US multimillionaire Jeffrey Epstein. Her claims are part of a wider case against Epstein, who is accused of “loaning out” the then-teenager to his friends and associates.
Epstein was jailed for 18 months in 2008 for seeking sexual relations with an underage girl.
It was revealed Sunday, however, that the businessman struck a “non-prosecution” deal that saw him confess to relatively minor charges in exchange for dropping more serious charges in Florida.
READ MORE:Britain’s Prince Andrew accused of using ‘under-age sex slave’
The agreement also allows any “co-conspirators” of Epstein to avoid future “criminal charges,” which means that even if allegations against the British royal were proven, he and any other of Epstein’s acquaintances would be immune from prosecution in the US.
Breaking its usual silence, Buckingham Palace wrote to media editors on Sunday asking them to remember their responsibilities under the Independent Press Standards Organisation’s code and the law.
Palace lawyers were also reportedly reviewing the coverage and “assessing the legal position” with respect to the weekend papers.
The Palace also issued a statement from aides, who categorically deny the claims made against Prince Andrew. The prince himself also issued a vehement denial whilst on vacation in Verbier, calling the allegations “false and without any foundation.”
 

Buckingham Palace (AFP Photo/Justin Tallis)
The statement from Buckingham Palace aides called the allegations “lurid and deeply personal,” saying they had broken the usual “no comment” reaction to “come out and say it’s not true.”
“The Duke did not want these claims to go uncontested,” the statement said.
“Commenting on a member of the royal family’s private life or commenting an ongoing legal case goes against what the palace would do typically.”
“The default position is no comment but these are extraordinary circumstances and given the allegations filed in court and coming from the Sunday papers, the decision was taken that it was time to issue a denial on the record,” the statement added.
More than 40 of Epstein’s alleged victims have spoken out since his initial prosecution, and even the attorney originally responsible for the secret “non-prosecution” deal appears to back the latest case.
In a letter from 2011, attorney R. Alexander Acosta said the new information could have altered the outcome of Epstein’s trial.
“Many victims have since spoken out, filing detailed statements in civil cases seeking damages. Physical evidence has since been discovered. Had these additional statements and evidence been known, the outcome may have been different,” he said.
Local news source the Palm Beach Daily News further said the secret agreement “did not serve the best interests of the victims.”
In a further development Monday, the father of Virginia Roberts said she had been flown to London by Epstein, where she had reportedly spent time with Prince Andrew. According to her father, the visit also included a trip to visit the prince’s mother, Queen Elizabeth II.
Buckingham Palace said it had no record of any such meeting.

Share this:

Thanks to: http://talesfromtheconspiratum.com

Of course they are immune from prosecution!!!

They find a dead girl on the front lawn and no one even blinks an eye!

PurpleSkyz wrote:Of course they are immune from prosecution!!!

They find a dead girl on the front lawn and no one even blinks an eye!

A few folks blinked purps, and more than a few questions were asked like

"how could a pencil get past all the security electronic, human, and otherwise never mind disposal of a body"

The girl as far as I can remember was from eastern europe, and the story is she got in with a bad crowd, also from eastern europe...that seemed to satisfy the media.

The question of.....

"how could a pencil get past all the security electronic, human, and otherwise never mind disposal of a body"

Was never answered

The question of Andrew

There is supposed to be evidence via images or video of this alleged behaviour, let's see if it surfaces. Whatever these Royals may or may not be in private, the one thing that is constant is as major public figures they are open to all sorts of "attacks".

Is Andrew stupid enough to let himself be knowingly comprised?
I doubt it very much

This girl was 17,the age of consent in Britain is 16

And most importantly, who gains from this?

As for exposing the networks of people abusing kids, this just might be another deflection away from the really serious bad guys, we have seen here a couple of examples with Saville and the "men of Pakistani origin" gangs



This raised two points, the integrity of the security responsible for Royal protection (much like the man that broke into Madges bedroom and had a chat with her) and if that was robust, how else did this dead girl appear on the residence grounds

He is untouchable, as are most of them....Heck, look at the Diana murder....obviously the plan of the queen.....cant let those secrets out....and in reference to the child kidnapping world....its complexity is massive.....about 6 years ago i worked with an undercover reporter working for the Washington post covering a mormon child kidnapping ring in Utah... well....she is now in COSTA RICA.....THEY STOLE EVERYTHING SHE HAD, FOLLOWED HER 24 HOURS A DAY AND THEN GAVE HER HER A CHOICE, LEAVE OR DIE...Its all about perception folks, the perception of gov, the perception of legal financial structure, perception of an honest medical system...etc...its all carefully designed and implemented........its just that simple.....

With respect Topspin

I disagree that that Spencer woman was removed on the instructions of Madge, she was a massively dangerous influence in many areas not least by the company she choose to keep. The term most often used to describe her by those whose company she kept was "useful idiot". She was far from "aware" and had signs of mental illness.

Despite that this woman was popular among the herds of blinkered fawning types who fell for the false image crap, for Madge to remove her could have resulted in Madge being forced to abdicate in favour of that womans eldest child. At that time a potential Croesus factor to far for Madge after the damage done by that Spencer woman and the other disaster Ferguson. That is even if Madge was so disposed to take this path.

As far as that woman was concerned the answer lies more with those who will allow so much and no more who work completely in the background.

As for the other subject, yes the more it is exposed it seems to have hideously infected everything that has any access to potential victims. And again it WAS that simple, there still remain elements that feel they are in the same untouchable world that once was but, it is crumbling in the manner such power bases always do, at first slowly then atonement.

I always kind of thought that Dodi's family ordered the hit.
With the blessing of Lizzie of course.

PurpleSkyz wrote:I always kind of thought that Dodi's family ordered the hit.
With the blessing of Lizzie of course.

Handy scapegoats purps, think about how elevated they would have been (Fayed) if this stupid woman had married Fayed jr, they would have been highly praised for placing someone of their faith so close to the corridors of power so easily. If this was a hit the candidates most likely to be responsible would be in the same vein as Dallas 1963.

So the Spencer woman is stupid...hmmmmmmmm.I think careless would be a better description...She didnt know who to trust and who not too...a mistake we all make at times..she let out a couple of deep dark secrets...bad idea.........

......