Nah, she should be charged too, if she's groomed others.You have to understand what grooming kids does to them , it brainwashes them , they might be under duress ,trafficed, it is victim blaming without ever being in their shoes
Induced and used unconscionably by people with literally all the 'privilege', recognition and power in the world. Never mind.Also groomed and brainwashed
The Marchioness of Cholmondeley may disagree with you on that front.He is well & truly on his own now and regardless of the outcome he won't be getting any of his titles and patronages back.
The stripped back Royal Family is happening by default. I'm an admirer of the Queen but not a huge monarchist so after she is sadly gone my preference would be to skip Chas & Cam and go straight to William & Kate. They are a great brand for the UK if we are still to have a monarchy.
You have to understand what grooming kids does to them , it brainwashes them , they might be under duress ,trafficed, it is victim blaming without ever being in their shoes
I agree. Turned my stomach when I read it. I think the question here should be whether she would have still done it had she not met Epstein, and I'm willing to give her the benefit of the doubt.
The bombshell news was announced by Buckingham Palace this evening
Buckingham Palace said in a statement this evening: "With The Queen's approval and agreement, The Duke of York’s military affiliations and Royal patronages have been returned to The Queen.
"The Duke of York will continue not to undertake any public duties and is defending this case as a private citizen
Fredo definitely needed to go. Stupid and a snakeFredo and Rothstein had to go too. No loss.
If you look closely in Michael's eyes, you can see that.
Cough.
I would say her hands are probably tied because the only other alterative explanation is of a mother washing her hands of her own offspring.If this chap is our Queens favourite son then I would hate to see what she has propensity to do with a prodical one. It's not every day of the week that your mum kicks you into touch when you've not even had a trial. Her son staunchly refutes the allegations legered against him and has openly said he would defend himself vehemently against these most scurlious of charges so why then has she ostrazised him?
My twopenny worth is that the Queen has obviously been advised to protect the monarchy and what is left of it and nothing more nothing less. I would say her hands are probably tied because the only other alterative explanation is of a mother washing her hands of her own offspring.
Five million or so is fook all Andrew so get the plaintiff paid and remove the pressure from our monarch allowing her to enjoy this very special of Platinum years.
She’s acted to protect the monarchy but the monarchy is stronger than it was in years gone by.If this chap is our Queens favourite son then I would hate to see what she has propensity to do with a prodical one. It's not every day of the week that your mum kicks you into touch when you've not even had a trial. Her son staunchly refutes the allegations legered against him and has openly said he would defend himself vehemently against these most scurlious of charges so why then has she ostrazised him?
My twopenny worth is that the Queen has obviously been advised to protect the monarchy and what is left of it and nothing more nothing less. I would say her hands are probably tied because the only other alterative explanation is of a mother washing her hands of her own offspring.
Five million or so is fook all Andrew so get the plaintiff paid and remove the pressure from our monarch allowing her to enjoy this very special of Platinum years.