Well if the only evidence is her word, a photo - the original of which she has previously refused to make available to a US court to examine - and she was over the age of consent in 2001 according to UK law then there is insufficient evidence to proceed.
Even sleazebag arrogant pricks are entitled to due process.
Personally I think the pic is photoshopped and PA was superimposed over an image of Prince Charles - the bright red coloured hands look like Prince Charles’ sausage like fingers… might explain why she wouldn’t make it available to court if it is a doctored image. PA may be being used as a whipping boy for PC as the heir apparent being implicated in Epstein would be much more damaging to the monarchy than a spare who is now way down the line of succession. Maybe this is why PC has been more vocal about the build back better bollox.
Being a coward doesn’t equate to evidence of guilt beyond reasonable doubt 🤷🏻♀️ He’s an Asshole but unfortunately the allegations are weak as there’s very little supporting evidence and the little there is is of questionable provenance or there are alternative explanations for that would cast reasonable doubt.
It does but it happens often if there is no reasonable prospect of a provable case unfortunately. A lack of evidence in this case would mean that - given the financial means of the defendant - it would cost a huge amount to try a case. The media covers means they would struggle to empanel an impartial jury (due to the huge amount of press coverage that Giuffre and her lawyers have courted). Then if they got a jury seated the fact that there is little actual evidence other than she said he said and a photo of questionable provenance that his lawyers would arguably get tossed - the only witness relates to him dancing with her in a night club which isn’t an offence - means it would be difficult for the CPS to spend all that money on a loser case. The slimy little toe rag may skate on this but Giuffre didn’t help herself by spouting to the press every 5 minutes.
They CAN NOT take action, he is a Royal above his subjects, and he can do anything he wants to his subjects. UK police and Scotland Yard are without power over him and are lying to the world.
Well if the only evidence is her word, a photo - the original of which she has previously refused to make available to a US court to examine - and she was over the age of consent in 2001 according to UK law then there is insufficient evidence to proceed. Even sleazebag arrogant pricks are entitled to due process. Personally I think the pic is photoshopped and PA was superimposed over an image of Prince Charles - the bright red coloured hands look like Prince Charles’ sausage like fingers… might explain why she wouldn’t make it available to court if it is a doctored image. PA may be being used as a whipping boy for PC as the heir apparent being implicated in Epstein would be much more damaging to the monarchy than a spare who is now way down the line of succession. Maybe this is why PC has been more vocal about the build back better bollox.
Andrew hid in his mommy's castle to avoid his warrant. Guilty, by evidence of cowardice.
Being a coward doesn’t equate to evidence of guilt beyond reasonable doubt 🤷🏻♀️ He’s an Asshole but unfortunately the allegations are weak as there’s very little supporting evidence and the little there is is of questionable provenance or there are alternative explanations for that would cast reasonable doubt.
Reasonable doubt is what a jury decides. Dropping the case denies due process of a trial, which there is enough evidence to proceed with.
It does but it happens often if there is no reasonable prospect of a provable case unfortunately. A lack of evidence in this case would mean that - given the financial means of the defendant - it would cost a huge amount to try a case. The media covers means they would struggle to empanel an impartial jury (due to the huge amount of press coverage that Giuffre and her lawyers have courted). Then if they got a jury seated the fact that there is little actual evidence other than she said he said and a photo of questionable provenance that his lawyers would arguably get tossed - the only witness relates to him dancing with her in a night club which isn’t an offence - means it would be difficult for the CPS to spend all that money on a loser case. The slimy little toe rag may skate on this but Giuffre didn’t help herself by spouting to the press every 5 minutes.
"It's one big club." And she ain't in it.
-In August, London’s Metropolitan Police force began a review of allegations connected to late convicted sex offender Epstein.
-The force said in a statement late Sunday that its “review has concluded and we are taking no further action.”
https://www.bostonherald.com/2021/10/11/uk-police-wont-act-against-prince-andrew-over-abuse-claim-2/
They CAN NOT take action, he is a Royal above his subjects, and he can do anything he wants to his subjects. UK police and Scotland Yard are without power over him and are lying to the world.
True but also true that the age of consent in the UK is 16.