Andrew Mountbatten Windsor, King Charles III's younger brother, is facing banishment from royal premises.

all 25 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 28 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

oh no how horrible, the pedophile is punished by living in a different luxury castle

I hate so much about this

the British monarch’s younger brother disgraced over his friendship with the deceased sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

Sure, it' not like Andrew himself is a child predator… he is being punished because he was a "friend" of one

Charles will be funding Andrew’s relocation and provide his brother an annual stipend from his own private resources — basically, the former prince will not live out his vintage years at the expense of the British taxpayer.

Of course because Charles has money from his succesful plumbing career

  • source
  • [–] 24 points 1 year ago (7 children)
  • [+] -11 points 1 year ago* (6 children)

    Did we even know if he knowingly committed a crime?

    What he did was disgusting and sleazy, but we would need evidence that he knew Virginia Giuffre was being trafficked, we don't even have enough evidence for that to speculate on.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    He had sex with underage girls. Wtf is wrong with you, defending a pedo?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Can you prove it in court? If not, he shouldn't go to prison. It's an easy formula.

    I'm perfectly happy calling him a nonce, but I'm also one of those old-fashioned types who values the rule of law and all...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    Not even an accusation against him. He'd have to know she was being trafficked in order to be legally guilty. I wouldn't be surprised if they chose a stupid idiot depraved prince to be their scapegoat.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    Virginia Giuffre was 17. That's not underage according to the laws of New York, USA and England, United Kingdom.

    And I'm not defending him. I'm only stating fact. As much as I'd like to see him locked up, you can only do so within the law.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Remote apart from the hourly train to King’s Cross and being a straight drive up the A10, and being ten minutes away from King’s Lynn… Siberia would have been kinder.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    "Oh no! Not Sandringham!" - Andrew, probably.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 18 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    How about we ban all the "royalty" from all these estates (and confiscate their wealth while we're on it) and use them for housing poor and homeless (and their wealth to finance this)? That seems less prone to scandals.

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [+] -6 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    That's theft

    Also they aren't even that rich by modern standards. They aren't billionaires.

    Most of the profit their land makes goes to the treasury anyway. They only get a tiny fraction of it

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -7 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    So you want to steal their private property? Then bankrupt a lot of homeless charities by making them use very expensive buildings, then have a lot of bored people with nothing to do because they’re stuck in a country estate?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    How do you think the royals and nobility got their estates?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    Private and remote enough that you need your own Lolita Express to get there.

  • source
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Y'all Brits need to get some Yankee in ya and uproot these weeds.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments