Jdsk wrote: ↑7 Sep 2021, 1:18pm
Is that about the criminal investigations or the new civil suit?
I was thinking about the NY attorney General who was looking into the matter. All this talk of non cooperation and they just don't seem to be pushing it just putting press statements out about non-cooperation. If there's a valid or diplomatic reason just state it then move on to what they can investigate. Just my opinion.
That sounds like the Federal criminal investigation. The prosecutors are based in New York, but it isn't a state matter.
I don't think that they have many powers to "push it". They have issued a mutual legal assistance treaty (MLAT) submission.
All my bags are packed, I'm ready to go
I'm standing here outside your door
I hate to wake you up to say good-bye
But the dawn is breaking, it's early morn
The taxi's waiting He's blowing his horn
Already I'm so lonesome I could die
So kiss me and smile for me, tell me that you'll wait for me
Hold me like you'll never let me go
'Cause I'm leaving on a jet plane
Don't know when I'll be back again
Oh, babe, I hate to go
There's so many times I've let you down
So many times I've played around
I tell you now they don't mean a thing
...
Psamathe wrote: ↑11 Sep 2021, 12:27am
In the words of John Denver
All my bags are packed, I'm ready to go
I'm standing here outside your door
I hate to wake you up to say good-bye
But the dawn is breaking, it's early morn
The taxi's waiting He's blowing his horn
Already I'm so lonesome I could die
So kiss me and smile for me, tell me that you'll wait for me
Hold me like you'll never let me go
'Cause I'm leaving on a jet plane
Don't know when I'll be back again
Oh, babe, I hate to go
There's so many times I've let you down
So many times I've played around
I tell you now they don't mean a thing
...
Ian
Fantastic.
I remember the words and I thought sounds a bit like new seekers but I had to go and look it up it was P P &M, but I think it needed them to make the song popular.
NA Thinks Just End 2 End Return + Bivvy - Some day Soon I hope You'll Still Find Me At The Top Of A Hill Please forgive the poor Grammar I blame it on my mobile and phat thinkers.
Tangled Metal wrote: ↑7 Sep 2021, 1:22pm
I was thinking about the NY attorney General who was looking into the matter. All this talk of non cooperation and they just don't seem to be pushing it just putting press statements out about non-cooperation. If there's a valid or diplomatic reason just state it then move on to what they can investigate. Just my opinion.
That sounds like the Federal criminal investigation. The prosecutors are based in New York, but it isn't a state matter.
I don't think that they have many powers to "push it". They have issued a mutual legal assistance treaty (MLAT) submission.
There's a convention that says papers have to be served to the person. These were served to a policeman who passed it on to lawyers. Technically not served according to the relevant international treaty. However I doubt he'll go there legally.
I cannot see how the American proceedings directly affect this although perhaps that's explained in some of the links above, posted without explanation of what they are meant to illustrate. Surely, all the allegations have been aired and all that's to come at the US end hearings which will hear the evidence: not something the media have been bothering to wait for. He's way, way out of the reach of the US courts.
What may make a difference is the fact that some of the allegations are about incidents in England, which look likely to cause investigations by the Met.
==============================================================
There's a convention that says papers have to be served to the person. These were served to a policeman who passed it on to lawyers. Technically not served according to the relevant international treaty. However I doubt he'll go there legally.
Which raises an interesting question. I accept our Police Service can keep Andrew safe but does their remit extend to avoiding him being server court papers?
I heard it reported that they tried the day before and the Police turned them away so I wonder if they checked after that and were told to accept the papers.
I've never been sure but if I sign for a recorded delivery letter on behalf of a neighbour (e.g. they are out) do I take responsibility for delivery?
thirdcrank wrote: ↑11 Sep 2021, 10:16am
I cannot see how the American proceedings directly affect this although perhaps that's explained in some of the links above, posted without explanation of what they are meant to illustrate. Surely, all the allegations have been aired and all that's to come at the US end hearings which will hear the evidence: not something the media have been bothering to wait for. He's way, way out of the reach of the US courts.
What may make a difference is the fact that some of the allegations are about incidents in England, which look likely to cause investigations by the Met.
==============================================================
I'm no legal expert but as I've seen it reported Andrew can ignore it all but the US case will go ahead and is far more likely to find against him if he offers no defence (e.g. does not even contest and of the evidence presented). And if the case is found against him he can ignore it until he sets foot in the US - which is likely something of an issue as many flights around the world are via the US.
Plus there is the aspect of the public regard of the Royal Family if one of them has had a court find against him in a case about under-age sex. And if the Royal Family have avoided by refusing to even engage - speaks volumes about their sense of entitlement and being above any sort of law anywhere in the world.
(Just what I've seen reported so open to being corrected)
Ian
What I'm trying to say is that with regard to proceedings in the US courts, the reputational damage is done. There can't be much if anything still to be revealed, the media have published what has been alleged as if it were fact so all that's in prospect there is the same stuff being aired in court. We've had the "car crash" interview and it's hard to see things getting any worse.
I've no idea if this affects the public's attitude either way to the Royal Family as an institution but I doubt it.
IMO The watershed will be the death of EIIR which may be some years off. So much will depend on the public's attitude towards the Cambridges at that point.
The reputational damage is done to both Andrew and the monarchy in general. What remains to be seen is: will Andrew be able to avoid the sort of sanction that Joe Public would have experienced? Is there one law for the monarchy and another for the rest of us?
I wonder if a court finding against him could make repetitional damage worse. So far it's "she said, he said" but a court case (even a civil court) finding gives what are currently accusations a more definitive status. Plus his ongoing alleged failure to cooperate all just adds to the bad smell.
AIUI, the case in the US is a civil one - seeking compo. Also AIUI, the only sanction which Andrew currently faces there is a compo order, which in the US can be a tidy sum. Unlike most of the rest of us, he's backed by effectively unlimited resources to cough up.
As I've tried to say, if the evidence triggers criminal investigations, especially in England, that would be potentially much more of a problem for him. I don't know the extent of any criminal investigation in the US. eg I don't know if criminal allegations have been reported to the relevant authorities over there, or what decisions have been taken. If evidence emerges of criminal offences in London, things may be escalated. We don't know (or I don't) the attitude of the complainant to co-operating with criminal proceedings here.
A factor in this might be the timing of the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell, which I think has been delayed to later this year. Maxwell presumably is in a position to harm or help Andrew's case if she agrees to testify. She would not do so before her own criminal trial (too much danger of giving evidence that could be used against her in her own trial), unless she did a deal with prosecutors to provide evidence against and testify against others, e.g. possibly including Andrew, in criminal proceedings.
slowster wrote: ↑11 Sep 2021, 1:57pm
A factor in this might be the timing of the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell, which I think has been delayed to later this year. Maxwell presumably is in a position to harm or help Andrew's case if she agrees to testify. She would not do so before her own criminal trial (too much danger of giving evidence that could be used against her in her own trial), unless she did a deal with prosecutors to provide evidence against and testify against others, e.g. possibly including Andrew, in criminal proceedings.
I thought (seem to remember reading) there was some sort of window soon closing (or now closed) on such historic cases. My understanding (from press reports) is that the complainant has been trying to get Andrew to cooperate for ages by only been stonewalled so she decided to submit her case before the window closed.
But that is only me recollection from UK press reports when the case was started.
