Jim Neal Posted August 12, 2021 Report Share Posted August 12, 2021 23 minutes ago, NoBodyImportant said: It was a magical time for my penis and I. Well.... that's a different kind of "shooting" report! 😵 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WalkedUp Posted August 13, 2021 Report Share Posted August 13, 2021 8 hours ago, NoBodyImportant said: Epstein never really paid for sex. According to his own accusers he would give them large amount of money and gifts while they hung out with him and he paid for non sexual messages. But it was well know that girls that didn’t put out was not invited back. I don’t fancy your chances as a solicitor or accountant! That’s the definition of payment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daveboy Posted August 13, 2021 Report Share Posted August 13, 2021 1 hour ago, WalkedUp said: I don’t fancy your chances as a solicitor or accountant! That’s the definition of payment. It's not though is it..Escorts have been using this loophole for years. you don't pay for sex you pay for their time...anything else is between consenting adults. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WalkedUp Posted August 13, 2021 Report Share Posted August 13, 2021 In the UK it is legal for adults to exchange sexual services for money. They do not need to hide that part. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daveboy Posted August 13, 2021 Report Share Posted August 13, 2021 36 minutes ago, WalkedUp said: In the UK it is legal for adults to exchange sexual services for money. They do not need to hide that part. Yes but the escort sites have to make sure they don't get done for pimping. In the UK, the exchange of sexual services for money is legal, but a number of activities, including soliciting in a public place, kerb crawling, owning or managing a brothel, pimping and pandering, are considered to be crimes, under the Sexual Offences Act 2003. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toontastic Posted August 13, 2021 Report Share Posted August 13, 2021 4 hours ago, WalkedUp said: In the UK it is legal for adults to exchange sexual services for money. They do not need to hide that part. Except she wasn't an adult, she was technically a child Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigbob Posted August 13, 2021 Report Share Posted August 13, 2021 If he wasnt a royal would there be that much fuss . I think not he would be deported to face the charges Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnphilip Posted August 13, 2021 Report Share Posted August 13, 2021 1 hour ago, Bigbob said: If he wasnt a royal would there be that much fuss . I think not he would be deported to face the charges If he was not a royal ,they would not be chasing him for money . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harrycatcat1 Posted August 13, 2021 Report Share Posted August 13, 2021 3 hours ago, toontastic said: Except she wasn't an adult, she was technically a child The age of consent refers to the age at which you can legally have sex. In England, Scotland and Wales the age of consent is 16, whether you're lesbian, gay, bi or straight. 'Sex' means penetrative sex, oral sex or masturbating together. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clangerman Posted August 13, 2021 Report Share Posted August 13, 2021 12 minutes ago, johnphilip said: If he was not a royal ,they would not be chasing him for money . he won’t have a problem speaking to the fbi then all they want is ANSWERS lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toontastic Posted August 13, 2021 Report Share Posted August 13, 2021 Just now, harrycatcat1 said: The age of consent refers to the age at which you can legally have sex. In England, Scotland and Wales the age of consent is 16, whether you're lesbian, gay, bi or straight. 'Sex' means penetrative sex, oral sex or masturbating together. Except the age of consent isn't fixed at 16. Having sex with a minor (under 18) that you care/responsible for is an offence. Also child prostitution covers minors (under 18) so IF she was 17 at the time and IF she was paid for a sex act then an offence was committed. Child pornography laws also covers minors (under 18) so a 17 year old can have sex but she can't be filmed doing it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harrycatcat1 Posted August 13, 2021 Report Share Posted August 13, 2021 1 minute ago, toontastic said: Except the age of consent isn't fixed at 16. Having sex with a minor (under 18) that you care/responsible for is an offence. Also child prostitution covers minors (under 18) so IF she was 17 at the time and IF she was paid for a sex act then an offence was committed. Child pornography laws also covers minors (under 18) so a 17 year old can have sex but she can't be filmed doing it. To cut a long story short if Andrew had committed offences in England he would have been arrested before now. Do you agree? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toontastic Posted August 13, 2021 Report Share Posted August 13, 2021 1 minute ago, harrycatcat1 said: To cut a long story short if Andrew had committed offences in England he would have been arrested before now. Do you agree? If he paid for sex with a minor I'd like to think so. But if he just had sex with someone above the age of censent but under 18 and there was no financial incentive payable to the female then NO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WalkedUp Posted August 13, 2021 Report Share Posted August 13, 2021 9 hours ago, toontastic said: Except she wasn't an adult, she was technically a child Please read all my other comments as you seem to have the complete wrong end of the stick as you have stated the exact same point I was making! 🤣 6 hours ago, johnphilip said: If he was not a royal ,they would not be chasing him for money . Harvey Weinstein is no heir to the Queen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuke Posted August 14, 2021 Report Share Posted August 14, 2021 12 hours ago, harrycatcat1 said: To cut a long story short if Andrew had committed offences in England he would have been arrested before now. Do you agree? I don't think your police force would have the guts to go after the royal family without definitivt proof. /M Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Malone Posted August 18, 2021 Report Share Posted August 18, 2021 As Danny dyer says “nut down, blower out” Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigbob Posted August 18, 2021 Report Share Posted August 18, 2021 Im think it now just shows his true character doing that and hiding behind mummy . if he had any respect he would of at least went and answered the questions Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WalkedUp Posted September 13, 2021 Report Share Posted September 13, 2021 I see our foremost peadophile is looking pretty shady trying to dodge the charge on a technicality. His poor PR and legal team must be having to work 24/7 at the moment just to keep his head above water. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clangerman Posted September 13, 2021 Report Share Posted September 13, 2021 any innocent man would rush to clear his name when it comes to sexual charges not cry about paperwork a woman this intent is not going to give up and rightly so Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WalkedUp Posted September 13, 2021 Report Share Posted September 13, 2021 The way he has handled it ensures the public do not need a trial. He is as much as guilty in the mind of any reasonable man without ad much as presenting a plausible defence or alternatively an apology. There is a contract dispute that I’m mediating between the two parties. When presented with the defendant party’s response to the claim and offer to meet the claimant with me, the claimant now will not agree to meet. The hallmark of a scoundrel. It is difficult because as mediator I am contractually obliged to maintain neutrality but I am secretly confident that the claimant’s case is spurious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave-G Posted September 13, 2021 Report Share Posted September 13, 2021 2 hours ago, WalkedUp said: The way he has handled it ensures the public do not need a trial. He is as much as guilty in the mind of any reasonable man without ad much as presenting a plausible defence or alternatively an apology. There is a contract dispute that I’m mediating between the two parties. When presented with the defendant party’s response to the claim and offer to meet the claimant with me, the claimant now will not agree to meet. The hallmark of a scoundrel. It is difficult because as mediator I am contractually obliged to maintain neutrality but I am secretly confident that the claimant’s case is spurious. Hmm - methinks its more to do with the 'we never comment respond or acknowledge' stance of the monarchy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mel b3 Posted September 14, 2021 Report Share Posted September 14, 2021 6 hours ago, Dave-G said: Hmm - methinks its more to do with the 'we never comment respond or acknowledge' stance of the monarchy. It's too late for that dave , he's already done the interview that made him look as guilty as hell mate 👍. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newbie to this Posted September 14, 2021 Report Share Posted September 14, 2021 (edited) Prince Andrew's Lawyer - "My client couldn't have sexually assaulted her, as we have a prior agreement so she can't talk about it." Edited September 14, 2021 by Newbie to this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WalkedUp Posted September 14, 2021 Report Share Posted September 14, 2021 🤣 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted September 14, 2021 Report Share Posted September 14, 2021 So, in the history of the US U.K. ‘special’ relationship, extradition from the UK to the US has normally been based on the US says they want someone and that someone is slung on a plane never to be seen again. That one way arrangement has never sat well with me. So, I’m interested to see what happens here and if any precedents are set. Don’t forget the spy’s wife we couldn’t get back for mowing down the kid near Lakenheath. And as for Prince Andrew - you know he’s a spoilt and detached from reality kind of brat because he genuinely thought that TV interview went well for him. What planet do these people come from 😆 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.