This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Visit the current forum | Forum Rules
| croydon proud |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by becky
Her story does seem to have changed several times already, and under oath for a couple too. First she said she had never met him, then in another testimony she admitted she had met him in London but said she never had sex with him, now he's supposed to have poked her all over the world. As I was always taught, once you are found out for a liar, no-one will ever quite believe anything you say again. Don"t tell bungle that last paragraph Becks! It will drive him to drink- parrrrrrrrrrrrrtaaaaaaaaaay!
|
|
|
Originally posted by silvertop
Yes but she was not molested by Andrew as a 7 year old. She was 17 and of age just about everywhere in the developed world save parts of the US. How could he have known her awful past? Andrew is supposedly not very nice but this case has all the trappings of a shake down. Nothing to do with what I said. Forgetting the Andrew story completely, describing someone who was groomed to that extent at a young age as a 'tart' is rank.
|
|
|
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle
Also complicated by the claim that the picture has been photoshopped even though the supposedly original picture seems to my uneducated eye to have been more tampered with. One might have assumed the origins of the picture were questioned when it first appeared? It does seem unbecoming for a grown man to be holding the waist of a 17 year old girl with one hand but perhaps it was the tube of Smarties in his other hand that was photoshopped out? Edited by Henry of Peckham (07 Feb 2022 4.26pm)
Denial is not just a river in Egypt |
|
|
Originally posted by Henry of Peckham
One might have assumed the origins of the picture were questioned when it first appeared? It does seem unbecoming for a grown man to be holding the waist of a 17 year old girl with one hand but perhaps it was the tube of Smarties in his other hand that was photoshopped out? Edited by Henry of Peckham (07 Feb 2022 4.26pm) I think that’s right in that the picture is a photo of a photo and not the original.
|
|
|
Originally posted by EverybodyDannsNow
Nothing to do with what I said. Forgetting the Andrew story completely, describing someone who was groomed to that extent at a young age as a 'tart' is rank. I don't disagree but I was making a different point.
|
|
| BlueJay |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle
I think that’s right in that the picture is a photo of a photo and not the original. In fairness this picture looks significantly more fake than the other one Regarding the original image even if it's real it's not as if it's crime of the century anyway. It's more what it has come to represent and the connection between the two individuals. Curious mind you, that no other images exist and so few people recall seeing them together? Though again, I don't deny the likelihood of some aspects of her story being true, just that it's also a convenient distraction from the wider story. Rather curious that the Maxwell case somehow didn't appear to actually involve speaking about any of the clients.. Who these people are must be known, but there is unlikely to be any follow up. Shameful.
|
|
|
Originally posted by ASCPFC
I guess that since he's been stripped of his military duties, his beret is now in the second hand store. very good
“That’s a joke son, I say, that’s a joke.” “Nice boy, but he’s sharp as a throw pillow.” “He’s so dumb he thinks a Mexican border pays rent” “ “Son… I say, son, some people are so narrow minded they can look through a keyhole with both eyes.”__ Forhorn Leghorn |
|
|
Breaking News on MSN . . . [Link]
This operation, will make the 'Charge Of The Light Brigade' seem like a simple military exercise. |
|
|
Originally posted by cryrst
Follow the money and that's all it was about otherwise the ta.... Money grabbing is always used as an excuse against women by some men. What we do know is (i) She was abused and (ii) she is donating the latest settlement money to charity. As to why anyone innocent would settle a case, I will leave that for the public to ponder.
Vive le Roy! |
|
|
Originally posted by the.universal
Money grabbing is always used as an excuse against women by some men. What we do know is (i) She was abused and (ii) she is donating the latest settlement money to charity. As to why anyone innocent would settle a case, I will leave that for the public to ponder. I would wonder why you would accept a settlement if you have a case against the other. Surely its about innocence or guilt and civil or not it should be pursued. Whether she's giving the money to charity or not is neither here nor there. Protecting others by revealing wronguns cannot be bought.
|
|
|
Originally posted by cryrst
Follow the money and that's all it was about otherwise the ta.... Naive. You do not understand court behaviour, the reality behind confidential settlements and the extraordinary pressure to make the matter go away on both sides. Also he has not been "cleared" as you suggest, in fact quite the reverse. His brother may restore his HRH when he is eventually king but I imagine a VERY quiet retirement for Andy.
|
|
|
Originally posted by the.universal
Money grabbing is always used as an excuse against women by some men. What we do know is (i) She was abused and (ii) she is donating the latest settlement money to charity. 1. As I understand, the money is being paid to HER charity, set up to help victims of abuse & trafficking, however, depending on where the charitable trust is based, many of them only require 5% of income to actually be used for the charitable purpose. 2. It spares his mother having her Platinum jubilee celebrations overshadowed by a long drawn out and no doubt messy case, with plenty of unsavoury facts coming out on both sides. Edited by becky (15 Feb 2022 9.02pm)
A stairway to Heaven and a Highway to Hell give some indication of expected traffic numbers |
|
|
Originally posted by the.universal
Money grabbing is always used as an excuse against women by some men. What we do know is (i) She was abused and (ii) she is donating the latest settlement money to charity. As to why anyone innocent would settle a case, I will leave that for the public to ponder. Incorrect. Andrew is giving the money to her charity. Take a look at that charity’s accounts and see what it pays her. Tax wise it’s the best way. Plus it makes all the wokes happy. Win win
|
|
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2025 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.