Independent Leyton Orient Forum

SvenO wrote: ↑Sat Jan 08, 2022 7:47 pm https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-58153711

Wasn't the age of concent 16 in the uk looking from a legal stand point

https://www.ageofconsent.net/world/united-kingdom

Yes it is
If that is the case its bad but is it illegal?

Did she consent then? And it wasnt just in London that he is alleged to fiddle her, is it?

tuffers#1 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 04, 2022 11:54 pm The agreement cleary states she would not bring cases against potential abusers. why else would any judge need to think about & then decide ? if its what as you say , then its straight to a criminal trial followed by a new civil case surely . Abuser/defendent just for clarity.

I'd hold off on starting up that legal practice

Adz wrote: ↑Wed Jan 12, 2022 10:51 pm

tuffers#1 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 04, 2022 11:54 pm The agreement cleary states she would not bring cases against potential abusers. why else would any judge need to think about & then decide ? if its what as you say , then its straight to a criminal trial followed by a new civil case surely . Abuser/defendent just for clarity.

I'd hold off on starting up that legal practice

All he has done is say that the agreement allows 2 interpretations of the agreement .

Andrews Lawyers now get to ask for dates times etc .

Its not in court yet .

Adz wrote: ↑Wed Jan 12, 2022 10:51 pm

tuffers#1 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 04, 2022 11:54 pm The agreement cleary states she would not bring cases against potential abusers. why else would any judge need to think about & then decide ? if its what as you say , then its straight to a criminal trial followed by a new civil case surely . Abuser/defendent just for clarity.

I'd hold off on starting up that legal practice

I understand the agreement applies (if it does at all) for alleged cases in Florida only.

Is Andrew (the man who told us that he can't perspire) beginning to sweat now?

Good to see that there is someone in Legal Practice who is not afraid to take on "Royalty".

Prince Andrew loses military titles and patronages and will no longer be known as HRH
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-59987935

Smendrick Feaselberg wrote: ↑Thu Jan 13, 2022 5:25 pm Prince Andrew loses military titles and patronages and will no longer be known as HRH
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-59987935

About bloody time. Well and truly Boco’d at last.

Prestige Worldwide wrote: ↑Wed Jan 12, 2022 3:04 pm

SvenO wrote: ↑Sat Jan 08, 2022 7:47 pm https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-58153711

Wasn't the age of concent 16 in the uk looking from a legal stand point

https://www.ageofconsent.net/world/united-kingdom

Yes it is
If that is the case its bad but is it illegal?

Did she consent then? And it wasnt just in London that he is alleged to fiddle her, is it?

If he fiddled her in the uk and she concented it would be legal i think but if he fiddled her somewhere the age of concent is 18 then she couldnt consent.
But if she is saying she didnt consent her being 1 year older wouldnt make a difference it would still be illegal.

This is my understanding from what i have read.

tuffers#1 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 12, 2022 2:55 pm

SvenO wrote: ↑Sat Jan 08, 2022 7:47 pm https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-58153711

Wasn't the age of concent 16 in the uk looking from a legal stand point

https://www.ageofconsent.net/world/united-kingdom

Yes it is
If that is the case its bad but is it illegal?

she alledges meetings in N.Y & American virgin islands .

She alledges one thing and him another they both said things it would be a little more important if a guilty verdict didnt only result in a millionaire having to pay a fine.

It’s about the money.

Dohnut wrote: ↑Thu Jan 13, 2022 9:50 pm It’s about the money.

Dohnut wrote: ↑Thu Jan 13, 2022 9:50 pm It’s about the money.

I thought sexual abuse should be a criminal offence but we could move to a financial based punishment system.
Ian Watkins must be very jellous.

I don't think there are any statues of Andy, so that's a relief at least

SvenO wrote: ↑Thu Jan 13, 2022 9:32 pm

tuffers#1 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 12, 2022 2:55 pm

SvenO wrote: ↑Sat Jan 08, 2022 7:47 pm https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-58153711

Wasn't the age of concent 16 in the uk looking from a legal stand point

https://www.ageofconsent.net/world/united-kingdom

Yes it is
If that is the case its bad but is it illegal?

she alledges meetings in N.Y & American virgin islands .

She alledges one thing and him another they both said things it would be a little more important if a guilty verdict didnt only result in a millionaire having to pay a fine.

Being a civil case its a he said she said case , he will be able to provide a diary as a royal at the time one would think.

tuffers#1 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 14, 2022 12:03 am

SvenO wrote: ↑Thu Jan 13, 2022 9:32 pm

tuffers#1 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 12, 2022 2:55 pm

she alledges meetings in N.Y & American virgin islands .

She alledges one thing and him another they both said things it would be a little more important if a guilty verdict didnt only result in a millionaire having to pay a fine.

Being a civil case its a he said she said case , he will be able to provide a diary as a royal at the time one would think.

If its that he will have to pay with public opinion as it is.
But again fine and rich person.

Settled out of court. I reckon he gave her the crown jewels, and I don't mean his mum's jewellery.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-60393843

Smendrick Feaselberg wrote: ↑Tue Feb 15, 2022 4:40 pm Settled out of court. I reckon he gave her the crown jewels, and I don't mean his mum's jewellery.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-60393843

Alls Well That Ends Well


He's free to replace Ling as Orient Director of Football now - got a lot of contacts with the young apparently

Prince Andrew has as many convictions for rape as you & I

Strange how he paid out all that money to a young woman he says he's never met!

Financial details undisclosed. That is revealing.

Give it to Jabo wrote: ↑Tue Feb 15, 2022 5:18 pm Financial details undisclosed. That is revealing.

Think what is more revealing is THE photo seems to have been lost by the claimant. That torpedoes her case and has probably forced her into a settlement, because Andrew's lawyers would have argued he couldn't have a fair trial if not able to examine the veracity of the photo. He has always said he does not recall meeting her.

money buys you anything.
at least he wont be able to look people in the eye.
nob.

Hmmm. I hope nobody will be thinking of calling Randy Andy a nonce after this ‘closure’ because it was never legally established in court and now it may be actionable. So whatever you do don't call Prince Andrew a nonce (thanks to some twitterati for providing the template for that wording)

Lucky timing that he sold that well-earned ski chalet he’d worked so,so hard for recently to help cover the settlement.

spen666 wrote: ↑Tue Feb 15, 2022 5:24 pm

Give it to Jabo wrote: ↑Tue Feb 15, 2022 5:18 pm Financial details undisclosed. That is revealing.

Think what is more revealing is THE photo seems to have been lost by the claimant. That torpedoes her case and has probably forced her into a settlement, because Andrew's lawyers would have argued he couldn't have a fair trial if not able to examine the veracity of the photo. He has always said he does not recall meeting her.

Why would Andy agree to a settlement if her case was torpedoed?

Long slender neck wrote: ↑Tue Feb 15, 2022 6:57 pm

spen666 wrote: ↑Tue Feb 15, 2022 5:24 pm

Give it to Jabo wrote: ↑Tue Feb 15, 2022 5:18 pm Financial details undisclosed. That is revealing.

Think what is more revealing is THE photo seems to have been lost by the claimant. That torpedoes her case and has probably forced her into a settlement, because Andrew's lawyers would have argued he couldn't have a fair trial if not able to examine the veracity of the photo. He has always said he does not recall meeting her.

Why would Andy agree to a settlement if her case was torpedoed?

Lots of reasons - mainly financial.

It was a civil case, so only remedy was compensation for the claimant.

It's cheaper to pay a lower sum to settle mow than risk having to pay a much larger sum after trial.



Ask the same question of the claimant