It still doesn't make someone guilty of the strongest of allegations, however.
Bill Clinton, Trump, plenty of high profile visitors.
They handled the cliff investigation appalling and tbf he wasnt good friends with a sex offender , staying with him for four days after he came out of prison is surely a red flag as was his no sweating and pizza stuff and also not meeting the seventeen yr old despite there being a pic of them , gary from a council estate would have been investigated to death, andrew is not in the uk , queens son , very bad opticsThe Met wouldn't go forward on any real investigation if the CPS tell them there is not enough to proceed?
Opening a very dangerous can of worms there if the police can basically ignore legal counsel and fast-track stuff to sate the appetite of the public.
We've seen some investigations they have carried out on people like Cliff Richard and where that has landed.
The Met wouldn't go forward on any real investigation if the CPS tell them there is not enough to proceed?
So you don't think his behaviour and obvious lies about what he would wear on a night out or inability to sweat are the least bit suspicious?
Dishonest behaviour that would be used against him if he ever ended up in court.
Why would you lie about something that could be easily disproven unless reacting to stress and guilt?
Even if he didn't commit any crimes himself he know more about what Epstein was up to than he let on.
They handled the cliff investigation appalling and tbf he wasnt good friends with a sex offender , staying with him for four days after he came out of prison is surely a red flag as was his no sweating and pizza stuff and also not meeting the seventeen yr old despite there being a pic of them , gary from a council estate would have been investigated to death, andrew is not in the uk , queens son , very bad optics
He's accused of rape, that's all he is defending himself on, not what else he might know or not.
Plenty of contradictory stuff, lies/vagueness to disassociate himself from any type of culpability, whatsoever, but being an entitled, arrogant snob, isn't enough for the Police or the CPS to push for Court, certainly if they have already concluded they don't have the sufficient evidence to proceed on a rape accusation.
Isn't that backwards? The CPS decide whether to prosecute, not whether to investigate.
It's the police's job to decide if it's in the public interest, then thoroughly investigate and present everything to the CPS.
That is simply incorrect. The CPS do not do that, t isn't their role. They review files of evidence prepared in police investigations. They don't decide what is investigated. They review what is given to them to see if charges will be brought. Cases also have to meet an evidential test prior to and in order for them to get to the CPS.The Met wouldn't go forward on any real investigation if the CPS tell them there is not enough to proceed?
Opening a very dangerous can of worms there if the police can basically ignore legal counsel and fast-track stuff to sate the appetite of the public.
We've seen some investigations they have carried out on people like Cliff Richard and where that has landed.
Ah yes because those two would never be connected to anything shady?!
Andrew's problem is that he stayed friends with Epstein once the whole world knew he was a sex trafficking pimp and rapist of underage girls.
The only reason you'd do that is if you a) Don't care b) Are friends with him because of that or c) Don't have a choice because he's blackmailing you.
In all three scenarios you're a guilty of something.
That is simply incorrect. The CPS do not do that, t isn't their role. They review files of evidence prepared in police investigations. They don't decide what is investigated. They review what is given to them to see if charges will be brought. Cases also have to meet an evidential test prior to and in order for them to get to the CPS.