When Mandleson passed info to Epstein in relation to the banking details he was privy to, was he a public servant/MP?
He was a government minister at the time (his peerage was to allow him to be brought in as a minister)
Presumably if he was, he can expect to also have his collar felt?
His houses have been searched. However there were several articles suggesting that misconduct in a public office is difficult to prove at least against senior politicians vs junior civil servants and the like.
Dont really understand why but there seemed lots of uncertainty from various legal commentators on whether it could stick or not.
Be interesting due to that to see what Andrew has been arrested for.
When Mandleson passed info to Epstein in relation to the banking details he was privy to, was he a public servant/MP? Presumably if he was, he can expect to also have his collar felt?
thats seems pretty likely, but as i understand it its quite a hard offence to convict on
i wonder if Andy has been up to even more stuff we don't know about?
also if they seized his computers, do you think he knows how to delete anything dodgy on there? shudder to think what his browsing history looks like
I expect mandlescum is far more practiced at the sort of stuff
When Mandleson passed info to Epstein in relation to the banking details he was privy to, was he a public servant/MP? Presumably if he was, he can expect to also have his collar felt?
He has already had his house(s) searched, so he is certainly on the list to be investigated.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c99k9yzzvm4o
Mandleson is up to his neck - and deserves to go straight through the traitors gate with sausage of the month (that's an 80's Spitting Image reference - they knew what he was like even then).
Depending on how cynical/tin foil hat you want to be it could be no coincidence they have arrested Andrew on a charge that is notoriously difficult to prove. They can go through this charade and then say he is innocent because no prosecution was achieved.
Charles can then say all is well and let his brother comeback into the fold.
I think the most shocking aspect of this story is the fact that King Prince Charles was opening London fashion week today. He only ever wears a boring grey suit and rain mac! Edgy.
Dread to think what other news is being snuck out under cover of the ridiculous focus on the arrest today.
Mandy must be sweating
Well that makes one of them
He’s already been released. Didn’t take long
He’s already been released. Didn’t take long
Not enough to question him on for now until they've analysed anything seized at the properties?
He’s already been released. Didn’t take long
No sweat
Hope the US is watching as only one person so far has been arrested.
Looking a tad moist
He’s already been released. Didn’t take long
Not unusual. they have a limited time to hold him before charging although a judge can extend this. Can't remember the time limits but a 12 hour detention for questioning under arrest the release is not unusual
Thames Valley Police has provided an update following Andrew leaving a police station following his arrest on suspicion of misconduct in public office.
In a statement the force says: "Thames Valley Police is able to provide an update in relation to an investigation into the offence of misconduct in public office.
"On Thursday we arrested a man in his sixties from Norfolk on suspicion of misconduct in public office.
"The arrested man has now been released under investigation.
"We can also confirm that our searches in Norfolk have now concluded."
It is understood that police searches in Berkshire are still underway.
Thames Valley Police says it will not be making any further statements at this time.
On Thursday we arrested a man in his sixties from Norfolk on suspicion of misconduct in public office.
Given how when Mandelsons properties were first searched the commentary was how hard that offence is to prove for anyone senior it seems doubly so for Andrews role and also what he got in return.
From what I vaguely understand its something which works best against junior people eg you hand me a brown envelope of fifty pound notes and I decide that small block of flats you want to build is fine then all the boxes are ticked. However once it becomes more abstracted eg you putting me up before, during and after or some future job prospects and me helping out with your request to flatten Luton and replace it with warehouses then it becomes messier. After all I could argue its in the countries interest Luton gets flattened and I suspect quite a few juries would agree. There is also not a direct link in terms of payments.
To take one of the Mandelson stories about how he got JPMorgan to try and get Darling to change his position on bankers bonuses. I could see a lawyer arguing along the lines of he thought it would damage the country and so asked for someone to back that up.
Looking a tad moist
Damn it, I was going to post that! Yeah, the photographer that got that shot have thought, "yep, that's the holiday paid for this year."
Depending on how cynical/tin foil hat you want to be it could be no coincidence they have arrested Andrew on a charge that is notoriously difficult to prove. They can go through this charade and then say he is innocent because no prosecution was achieved.
Charles can then say all is well and let his brother comeback into the fold.
I don't think Charles is that bothered about his brother as such, particularly when this has the chance to damage the monarchy.
I was chatting to a friend earlier about this. Charles is basically head of a large company that can't go bust and ensures that he and his children and his children's children etc etc will never know poverty and have the best healthcare and general privilege that money can buy. He'll protect that at all cost.
It really is a 'firm' in the truest sense and the only way it can ever fail is to end. He'll there his brother under the bus to avoid that in a heart beat.
The monarchy won't come to an end in my lifetime but it must be brought to an end. I hope this whole sorry episode hastens its demise.
The Monarchy has always been a 'firm'. We are lucky we can say what we want without getting deaded.
We did discuss an old fashioned departure for Andy at work, then said a GOT one would be more fun.
Death by starving Corgi ....
He’s already been released. Didn’t take long
I suspect he is well-advised (which is a shame) and has given a no comment interview. It doesn't mean he's off the hook by any means.
After seeing how the rich elites in the USA are most definitely above the law - it's a (little) reassuring to see that even a prominent member of the royal family in the UK can, and will, be held to account.
As the Epstein investigation identified how the rich use the poor as their cheap disposable toys. I'm hoping they find and identify other revelations from Andrew that will undermine be their positions.
Death by starving Corgi ...
The new house he's in must have some second storey windows. If he was in Russia , someone would have opened a couple for him and helped him to see the view well before now.
Looking a tad moistLooks like they may have gone for the full body search when they took him into custody. Can't trust these hardened criminals one bit.
After seeing how the rich elites in the USA are most definitely above the law - it's a (little) reassuring to see that even a prominent member of the royal family in the UK can, and will, be held to account
It would be nice. However Andrew is protected by the State Immunity Act 1978 and possibly sovereign immunity as he was still a working royal at the time of the alleged offences
Another entirely un-evidenced conspiracy theory I came up with while on the throne this morning....
....what if this is a shot over the bows to Nonce Andrew. Perhaps he was thinking of 'speaking his truth' again somehow, and this is the firms way of telling him to stfu?
....makes you think
I can imagine Prince William producing that photo of Andrew to his sons once they start feeling their oats. "Now boys, remember Uncle Andy..."
Plus it's a warning shot over the bows of any other royal with an, ahem, naughty streak.
I can imagine Prince William producing that photo of Andrew to his sons once they start feeling their oats. "Now boys, remember Uncle Andy..."
Plus it's a warning shot over the bows of any other royal with an, ahem, naughty streak.
Which ones don’t have a naughty streak? Charles and William are happy being slum landlords and billing taxpayers huge sums for renting land they somehow own. Both have been unfaithful. Charles has some very dubious friends in the Middle East who give him bags of cash and that’s before his relationship with Saville.
I can imagine Prince William producing that photo of Andrew to his sons once they start feeling their oats. "Now boys, remember Uncle Andy..."
Plus it's a warning shot over the bows of any other royal with an, ahem, naughty streak.
Which ones don’t have a naughty streak? Charles and William are happy being slum landlords and billing taxpayers huge sums for renting land they somehow own. Both have been unfaithful. Charles has some very dubious friends in the Middle East who give him bags of cash and that’s before his relationship with Saville.
I am far from being a monarchist nor a fan of the current and expected future occupants to the roles - but did I miss the William adultery story? Has anyone produced any evidence Charles was aware Saville was a sex predator - or was he simply part of the veil of credibility that saville used? Don’t play the “everyone knew” card because clearly not everyone knew - and whilst some people did seem to know and hint at it often in coded language rather than outright accusations. Once people start making these sort of claims without anything to support them my eyes tend to roll, as they sound conspiracy theory…
in E&W it is 24 hrs, but in all cases there should be regular reviews and you need a legitimate purpose to hold someone and deprive them, even temporarily, of their liberty. That’s as it should be - any one of us could be arrested tomorrow for an allegation and the custody sergeant needs to be convinced that there’s a legitimate reason to hold you. If the purpose is to interview you, then when they get to the end of the interview they either need to release you or have another reason to hold you. Despite the media frenzy it will likely be weeks or months before any decision is made on charging. Given who it is, the charging decision isn’t going to be made by some lowly trainee solicitor in the CPS! Even if it gets to a charge it doesn’t guarantee it will get to court or that a trial will ever actually happen - conspiracy theorists will of course claim any decision not to pursue it must be a sign of interference but cases get dropped multiple times a day for all sorts of reasons.He’s already been released. Didn’t take long
Not unusual. they have a limited time to hold him before charging although a judge can extend this. Can't remember the time limits but a 12 hour detention for questioning under arrest the release is not unusual
Re trial - I’m not sure it could go to trial by jury ?
ie when they swear in the jury, everyone knows who he is and the back story so makes it impossible to bring a ‘fair’ trial
im sure if it gets that far his defence lawyer will try that argument! That said there are plenty of high profile cases which go to juries. I’m not sure that in this case the average member of the public does know “the back story”. They know about the photo and the dodgy interview that he used to try and explain it away - but he not been arrested for that - it’s likely the accusations relate to the passing of government secrets to his friends. I doubt the average member of the public can explain what those secrets were, how they are shared or what impact sharing them had. Moreover the crown would need to show that his actions were improper - which might sound obvious but I really wouldn’t be surprised if the defence said, the whole reason his role existed was because he could/would get information to/from key financial market influencers! A properly instructed Jury would be told to ignore the media furore around the accused and what he may or may not have done but instead focus their minds purely on the evidence before them on the charge he is accused of. I think that is possible - although the current sensationalism in the press might be undermining that. Ironically they would love him to be convicted, but he’s likely to claim (if it gets that far) that its a witch hunt driven by the media which has caused the situation to be twisted against him.Re trial - I’m not sure it could go to trial by jury ?
ie when they swear in the jury, everyone knows who he is and the back story so makes it impossible to bring a ‘fair’ trial
but did I miss the William adultery story?
Yes. It was all over the European press as headline news but not published in the UK. I happened to be Italy at the time.
aka prince of pegging
Interesting that one of the first things to happen was his gun license going. Wouldn't want him to do an Epstein.
Fact is this arrest was for a very difficult charge to prove, and his role/powers as business envoy were apparently very vague. Wouldn't be at all surprised that the CPS don't proceed.
If nothing else, it buys time and possibly access to evidence related to the abuse claims, and with the other European investigations, it shows how poor the Americans have been.
My mate said it was next Wednesday !
Probably just as well that he’s been subjected to all that vigorous sex.
At that age, most of us would have succumbed to a heart attack, or at least a stroke, what with all the media attention.
If nothing else, it buys time and possibly access to evidence related to the abuse claims, and with the other European investigations, it shows how poor the Americans have been.
Eh? I don’t think the Americans have any power to arrest him for misconduct in public office… They’ve been asking to talk to him for some time.
The bit about America isn't really about Andrew, it is the fact no-one else has been brought to account for what has been going on...in Europe we seem to be making something of all this, whereas in America, nothing is happening and no-one seems to be under any pressure to do anything. A statement is released saying they were unaware and that is it...
Andrew is probably the most high profile person in this now and things are being pursued as more of this stuff gets released the more we are seeing what he has been doing and it quite rightly is being questioned as it all seems to be wrong.
Some crackers here
Sorry, but that is just utter shite.
It only gets worse. Really not good.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/royals/andrew-accused-watching-girl-tortured-36746315
In Europe we seem to be making something of all this, whereas in America, nothing is happening
Let's not start the (consensual) Eurocirclejerk too soon. We are just at the start of a long road.
It only gets worse. Really not good.
Important distinction between the FBI alleging something and the FBI reporting that an anonymous person alleged something. There was a whole lot of nonsense allegations (some made by mistaken people, some made by hurt people, and some just trolling) were made in the course of Dolphin Sq, Pizzagate, Hampstead conspiracies etc.
Much as we hate Andrew (for many reasons), that doesn't mean that any or every allegation is true.
Much as we hate Andrew (for many reasons), that doesn't mean that any or every allegation is true.
Yep, just sensationalist news stories now under the guise of "it's been alleged that...." or "a source close to the investigation reported that..."
Pretty much allows the papers free rein to print whatever bollocks they want with limited comeback.
Still, they built the Royal Family up and the papers love nothing more than building someone up then tearing them down again. The period of detente that seemed to exist after Diana and then the Leveson Inquiry seems to be well and truly over.
The period of detente that seemed to exist after Diana and then the Leveson Inquiry seems to be well and truly over.
Off topic, but largely because they bottled Leveson Pt2
I see William used this as cover to go and see the dark lords of the Middle East for reasons not explained
I see William used this as cover to go and see the dark lords of the Middle East for reasons not explained
Yes. It says volumes about the current state of play of the royal family when a trip to go and spend time in the company of the man universally now credited with ordering the murder and dismembering of Khashoggi is seen as beneficial to being seen in public with your uncle.
The parallels between Epstein and MVS aren't great. Obviously he appears significantly in the Epstein papers but he also has an island he likes to spend 6 months a year on. Where no Saudi nations are allowed to work and the western employees have to hand over all the electronic devices before arrival. And all the guests are special invitees with a striking resemblance to Epstein party guest list. And the beaches are walked by (very very young) Russian girls ordered off an online catalogue and paid £3K a day for their aesthetic appeal..and maybe more.
Interesting that one of the first things to happen was his gun license going. Wouldn't want him to do an Epstein.
Fact is this arrest was for a very difficult charge to prove, and his role/powers as business envoy were apparently very vague. Wouldn't be at all surprised that the CPS don't proceed.
If nothing else, it buys time and possibly access to evidence related to the abuse claims, and with the other European investigations, it shows how poor the Americans have been.
TBH I did wonder if it’s a bit of royal PR, before he slips off to a nice house in Dubai paid for by some unknown benefactors.
Going to to interesting to see how much legal jeopardy he is actually in.
Yes. It says volumes about the current state of play of the royal family when a trip to go and spend time in the company of the man universally now credited with ordering the murder and dismembering of Khashoggi is seen as beneficial to being seen in public with your uncle.
Well let's say hypothetically you wanted someone with the ability to persuade a certain person of your acquaintance to a place where they might just disappear and end up in numerous small packages then maybe you have another motive for the visit.
I see William used this as cover to go and see the dark lords of the Middle East for reasons not explained
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c99k91gj09eo
An actually quite balanced piece on the BBC about it. This will have been in the planning for a long time, it's not something you can just phone up and say "hey, things are a bit awkward at home, mind if William pops out for some photo op stuff?"
On a thread like this I really miss jivehoneywhateveritwas 🙁
Am I the only one who thinks that the press, especially the BBC, have been completely obnoxious about this? Say what you like, nothing has yet to be proved in court and until it is they should really try to be a bit less offensive. Tother day the BBC were reporting that Andrew had refused to comment as if he was obliged to do. What did they expect? The rights and wrongs of whatever he has been up to are generally irrelevant to the rest of us yet the press are ramming it down our throats. Yet another reason to despise the press and journalism .
Actually, has Andrew actually been convicted of any offence yet? No idea, I won't give the press the **** of my shoes. Could be worse, he could be our current PM.
Yet another reason to despise the press and journalism .
Actually, has Andrew actually been convicted of any offence yet? No idea
If only there were an industry devoted to identifying and describing such major developments to the general public.
Am I the only one who thinks that the press, especially the BBC, have been completely obnoxious about this? Say what you like, nothing has yet to be proved in court and until it is they should really try to be a bit less offensive. Tother day the BBC were reporting that Andrew had refused to comment as if he was obliged to do. What did they expect? The rights and wrongs of whatever he has been up to are generally irrelevant to the rest of us yet the press are ramming it down our throats. Yet another reason to despise the press and journalism .
The problem is, it's simultaneously one of the biggest news stories in years, and yet there's nothing to say. It's not like they can just go "Andrew M-W has been detained in police custody. We have nothing further to add so here's Leo, a corgi from East Kilbride who can speak French."
It reminds me of when Princess Diana died. The radio was rolling solemn music interspersed with "We interrupt you to say that Princess Diana has died... now we'll cut to our Royal Correspondent for Dead Princesses... Hello, I'm the Royal Correspondent for Dead Princesses and I can confirm that Princess Diana is definitely dead... now back to the news room to tell you that she's still dead..."
I think the coverage is reasonable. It's revealed that people around the world who I already thought dodgy were even dodgier than I imagined. Epstein's address book is like a who's who of people who showed signs of having traits it might be possible to pander to and exploit. He played on weaknesses, sometimes sexual and sometimes not. Greed, sex, the arts, corruption - they were all things that once people compromised themselves with him could be used as levers and exploited. It's kgb style honey trap stuff and makes fascinating reading.
There is plenty to say as each new release of documents revives the affaire, it just requires the manpower to read it all. Handing governement information to random foreigners is usually regarded as spying but here it's just abuse of his position as a trade envoy. The media seem quite restrained.
I've never liked Andrew, I'm the same age as him within a few months and when little my mother used to compare me with him holding him up as a model. Then it was heroic Andy, randy Andy, beef bayonet Andy and that God awful thing he so appropriately married. I'm lovin' it all 🙂 not 🙁 If it weren't for the collatoral damage in this festival of the rich and famous making fools and vilains of themselves I'd be revelling in it. But I keep having to give myself a slap and remember the victims lured into Epstein and Maxwell's trap.
im not actually sure it is that big a news story - he’s not been charged certainly not convicted, and it’s not for the offences which really upset the public, which he may or may not have actually broken any laws even if he did some of them.The problem is, it's simultaneously one of the biggest news stories in years, and yet there's nothing to say.
If it was up to me there would be a general rule that people were not identified on arrest (by the police or others) until court proceeding started. If there was a genuine interest of justice to name someone (eg so other victims/witnesses might come forward) it would require approval from judges who would way up the risk to the person who is innocent until proven guilty.
now that WOULD be a proper story, with something to sayIt's not like they can just go "Andrew M-W has been detained in police custody. We have nothing further to add so here's Leo, a corgi from East Kilbride who can speak French."
Not sure judges should be allowed to greatly increase the risk to the person. 😉
If it was up to me there would be a general rule that people were not identified on arrest (by the police or others) until court proceeding started. If there was a genuine interest of justice to name someone (eg so other victims/witnesses might come forward) it would require approval from judges who would way up the risk to the person who is innocent until proven guilty.
There already exists a reasonable expectation of privacy before charge,the Supreme Court ruled on this so, the police don't routinely release names of arrested persons. If someone thinks their right have been abused they can take action . If you've been repeatedly named in relation to possible offences, overseas, or given a tv interview on the matters in the UK I suspect you might struggle to protect your privacy as the matter isn't really private😄
I think the coverage is reasonable. It's revealed that people around the world who I already thought dodgy were even dodgier than I imagined. Epstein's address book is like a who's who of people who showed signs of having traits it might be possible to pander to and exploit. He played on weaknesses, sometimes sexual and sometimes not. Greed, sex, the arts, corruption - they were all things that once people compromised themselves with him could be used as levers and exploited. It's kgb style honey trap stuff and makes fascinating reading.
I think what will be revealing about this - in terms of Andrew's case and Mandelsons as well - is the Epstein file release only reveals peoples actions in relation to Epstein. With these Misconduct allegations we only see what Epstein's files and so far revealed - which is only the information Epstein chose to keep (and that the DOJ hasn't redacted or withheld) . They show in both instances Andy and Mandy seemingly very casually passing sensitive material to Epstein - they don't seemingly show Epstein charming, pressuring, coercing or conspiring to obtain the info. The UK investigations will obviously take in all their dealings, not just those with Epstein - so will show whether they were just blurting out confidential info to all and sundry or if Epstein had a particular hook in them that no-one else had.
I think with Andy it may be more the former rather than the latter - it was interesting reading over the weekend that Charles had tried to block his appointment as Trade Envoy back in 2001 as it saw it as a 'disaster waiting to happen'.
I wonder if Andrew also went crying to mummy about Charles being king turning into a disaster. That’s turned out to be true aswell
The UK investigations will obviously take in all their dealings, not just those with Epstein - so will show whether they were just blurting out confidential info to all and sundry or if Epstein had a particular hook in them that no-one else had.
Indeed. With Mandleson we know he liked holidaying with Russian oligarchs and the like. I find it very likely that information was being leaked to people other than Epstein that could also help him maintain a certain lifestyle. Mountbatten-Windsor being solely dependant on Epstein seems slightly more likely, as he seems arguably less cunning/strategic, but it's far from certain. Someone else having their fingers in him, and getting pats on the back in the form of information from him, has to be investigated.
Some crackers here
If you're going to post links to ai slop its worth checking who the grim convicted racist is who's creating it
I'm not here to defend him, but the police made a statement which didn't name him, but allowed the press to very easily identify him - an age, searching two properties with the rough location and a misconduct in public office offence, was inevitably going to allow the press to piece together who it was. Of course it would probably have been hard to stop it leaking out anyway as someone at the police station or the royal household would be leakier than a sieve. So I'd actually prefer if the press were simply not allowed to report the identity of accused people.If it was up to me there would be a general rule that people were not identified on arrest (by the police or others) until court proceeding started. If there was a genuine interest of justice to name someone (eg so other victims/witnesses might come forward) it would require approval from judges who would way up the risk to the person who is innocent until proven guilty.
There already exists a reasonable expectation of privacy before charge,the Supreme Court ruled on this so, the police don't routinely release names of arrested persons.
If someone thinks their right have been abused they can take action .
The problem is you have the Streisand Effect - taking action isn't necessarily the best course of action even if you've done nothing wrong, or have done something wrong but it doesn't merit a circus.
But he hasn't given a TV interview on misconduct in public office allegations, nor has that been the focus of the overseas allegations. I'm not sure he's even been explicitly accused of any crime overseas. Being friends with a sex trafficker is not a good look for royalty but its not actually a crime. He may or may not have been leaking information to his friend, and if he was I welcome a prosecution, but I'd rather it had every chance of success rather than being undermined by a media frenzy.If you've been repeatedly named in relation to possible offences, overseas, or given a tv interview on the matters in the UK I suspect you might struggle to protect your privacy as the matter isn't really private😄
I really couldn't care about Andrew, but the principle of naming people or providing enough information to effectively name them and then trial by media is the opposite of what presumption of innocence has always been about. The fact he's sleazy and presented a spectacularly bad public interview doesn't detract from the principles of a fair trial.
If you're going to post links to ai slop its worth checking who the grim convicted racist is who's creating it
Folk posting such a.i. shit without examining where it comes from should have a 3 strikes and ur out policy against them
The ai slop tsunami has only just begun. I’ve started to see the occasional thing that’s actually quite good and I’m not sure how to feel about it.
They're having a debate, tabled by the lib dems, in the commons nominally about the sweaty nonce and releasing documents about his role as a trade envoy. This seems to involve a succession of MPs standing up and recounting their dealings with him and what an arrogant, entitled and utterly obnoxious **** he was/is
I’m not entirely sure what the point of the debate is beyond giving MPs the opportunity to have a go at him on record. It’s not as if it’s going to change anything or lead to us having any better understanding of the role of the rest of the family in this mess
It's to force release of correspondence to show the link between Mandleson and Mountbatten-Windsor, as it is suspected that the former worked hard to get (and later keep) a role for the (at the time) Prince that others thought he was very unsuitable for... which given how strong the links between both of them and Epstein have now been shown to be, could be important in showing how Epstein's network operated, which could be key to making more of his associates feel a bit hot under the collar... and ideally collared and maybe even imprisoned. Pressure to change how we appoint people to these royals (as suggested by former PM Brown) could also follow if we get to see more detail of these back room/door deals.
If all you're interested in is bringing down the Royal Family, and the end of Monarchy, this motion isn't going to help with that at all. Well, beyond it being another tiny step towards more scrutiny and questioning as regards a particular royal, that might become a precedent people look back on if/when people push for more accountability for all of them. I for one want far more transparency, as I think that's the only way to show the public what they actually support when they support a hereditary monarchy (which I do not).
It's to force release of correspondence to show the link between Mandleson and Mountbatten-Windsor,
That doesnt need them all to be putting the boot in though. I think the main purpose would be demonstrating that perhaps it isnt a good idea to not allow mps to criticise/comment on the royal family.