Prince Andrew interview about epstein is a total farce

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: oldcarpy

You don't own the land unless you are a freeholder.

That's the crown.

Half of England is owned by less than 1% of the population.

Well I am the freehold owner of my house.

originally posted by: stonerwilliam

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: Grenade

In the real world I do own my house and can sell it if I want to.

No you dont own the gold. Its quite complicated.

All you own is the air inside that house as you are the TENANT of the property look at your deeds , G-D owns everything and the queen is his appointee here on earth all under maritime law , they even own your children from the age of 7

www.emersonkent.com...

Do you have any source to back up any of this?

Essentially all land is owned by the Crown, what everybody else holds is something known as an estate in the land, or a bundle of rights over that piece of land. The highest right you can have is a fee simple absolute in possession, which is more commonly known as freehold. (The Queen is not "The Crown". The Crown is the representation of the rulership of a sovereign country but is separate from the person who is the actual Crowned ruler.)

Things like planning permission aren't in place due to you not actually owning the land. They are there to balance the competing rights of adjacent land owners. eg. by exercising your right over your land you may totally ruin somebody elses if you block all their light etc.

Anyway, that aside, freehold land passes down to your heirs, and this can mean going to your brothers etc as well as your kids, however if you have no more heirs then it will revert back to the Crown- this reflects where true ownership lies.

But don't worry, in practical terms you may as well own it, but legally there is a distinction.

originally posted by: oldcarpy

originally posted by: stonerwilliam

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: Grenade

In the real world I do own my house and can sell it if I want to.

No you dont own the gold. Its quite complicated.

All you own is the air inside that house as you are the TENANT of the property look at your deeds , G-D owns everything and the queen is his appointee here on earth all under maritime law , they even own your children from the age of 7

www.emersonkent.com...

Do you have any source to back up any of this?

www.royal.uk...

Archbishop: Will you to the utmost of your power maintain the Laws of God and the true profession of the Gospel?

originally posted by: stonerwilliam

originally posted by: oldcarpy

originally posted by: stonerwilliam

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: Grenade

In the real world I do own my house and can sell it if I want to.

No you dont own the gold. Its quite complicated.

All you own is the air inside that house as you are the TENANT of the property look at your deeds , G-D owns everything and the queen is his appointee here on earth all under maritime law , they even own your children from the age of 7

www.emersonkent.com...

Do you have any source to back up any of this?

www.royal.uk...

Archbishop: Will you to the utmost of your power maintain the Laws of God and the true profession of the Gospel?

Is that it?

originally posted by: oldcarpy

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: stonerwilliam

You want to see what the likes of the British East India Company got up to by way of maritime law.

You can always just watch a Pirates of the Caribbean film.

That's almost verbatim what the Courts ruled when there was a flood of people trying to apply maritime law to get out of debt, council/any tax and similar several years ago due to the distinct lack of people with wooden legs, eye patches and pockets full of doubloons.

It all stemmed from some weird Freeman of the Land movement that both far left and far right organisations. An organisation calling itself the British Constitution Group made it all up and wrote a couple of articles for The Grauniad about it in 2011 - but the paper was forced to issue a retraction after actual lawyers got in contact with the paper detailing the various reasons why that level of idiocy would send someone directly to jail.

This is a good summary here: ukhumanrightsblog.com...

a reply to: bastion
'Haaaaaar - the scurvy dogs. Etc.

originally posted by: stonerwilliam

originally posted by: oldcarpy

originally posted by: stonerwilliam

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: Grenade

In the real world I do own my house and can sell it if I want to.

No you dont own the gold. Its quite complicated.

All you own is the air inside that house as you are the TENANT of the property look at your deeds , G-D owns everything and the queen is his appointee here on earth all under maritime law , they even own your children from the age of 7

www.emersonkent.com...

Do you have any source to back up any of this?

www.royal.uk...

Archbishop: Will you to the utmost of your power maintain the Laws of God and the true profession of the Gospel?

Whats that? The Queen is head of the Church of England?
What a shocker!
Who'd of thought it!?

a reply to: bastion

Like in the case of Birds Custards Ltd v Rowntrees Jellies Ltd ( CA 1979) in which Lord Denning (as he then was) dismissed the claim saying " The law does not concern itself with trifles".



OK. I made that up.

Am unable to watch the interview at the moment but did manage to ask Andrew about his father's (and brother's) incredibly close connection to notorious paedophile Jimmy Saville?

a reply to: karl 12

No that was not mentioned.
It was quite obvious that the arrogant git must have ignored any legal or PR advice he would have received but that is typical of him.
I think his press officer resigned about this a couple of weeks ago.

originally posted by: oldcarpy

Andrew is well known for not taking advice.
He is that arrogant.
No lawyer would advise him to say what he did. Neither would any PR expert!
Total car crash of an interview.
Disgusting.

The guru hired by Prince Andrew to spearhead a PR 'fightback' following the Jeffrey Epstein scandal 'quit' just weeks into job ahead of the Duke's bombshell BBC interview, it was revealed last night. Jason Stein started as Communications Secretary to the Duke in September.

He should have listened ...... no point in having a dog and barking oneself!

a reply to: eletheia

That is what an arrogant prig he is.

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: eletheia

That is what an arrogant prig he is.

Lol!! Do you think that Pizza Express will get a royal warrent ?

a reply to: eletheia

Would it now be worth anything?
They would probably want to keep it quiet now.
Watching the interview again.
Jaw droppingly awful.
Going on about how his security people would have been there when that photo was taken.
Where were they at Pizza Express?
What a despicable liar.

He said he did not even know where the bar was at Tramp night club!
For goodness sakes!
How many times has he been there?
What a crock of BS!
Just how stupid does he take us for?!!!

a reply to: 2Faced

I'm watching this now...

This dude is suck a boldface liar. The whole interview is riddled with contraindications.

originally posted by: karl 12
Am unable to watch the interview at the moment but did manage to ask Andrew about his father's (and brother's) incredibly close connection to notorious paedophile Jimmy Saville?

No, for those outside the UK the transcript of the full interview is available here: www.bbc.co.uk... it's absolutely brutal and he's lying so much he contradict himself in the same sentences.

Key pieces:

---
EM: So in 2006 in May an arrest warrant was issued for Epstein for sexual assault of a minor.

PA: Yes.

EM: In July he was invited to Windsor Castle to your daughter, Princess Beatrice's 18th birthday, why would you do that?
------


EM: In 2008 he was convicted of soliciting and procuring a minor for prostitution, he was jailed, this was your friend, how did you feel about it?

PA: Well I ceased contact with him after I was aware that he was under investigation and that was later in 2006 and I wasn't in touch with him again until 2010. So just it was one of those things that somebody's going through that sort of thing well I'm terribly sorry I can't be… see you.
....
EM: He was released in July, within months by December of 2010 you went to stay with him at his New York mansion, why? Why were you staying with a convicted sex offender?

PA: Right, I have always… ever since this has happened and since this has become, as it were, public knowledge that I was there, I've questioned myself as to why did I go and what was I doing and was it the right thing to do? Now, I went there with the sole purpose of saying to him that because he had been convicted, it was inappropriate for us to be seen together.

EM: He threw a party to celebrate his release and you were invited as the guest of honour.

PA: No, I didn't go. Oh, in 2010, there certainly wasn't a party to celebrate his release in December because it was a small dinner party, there were only eight or 10 of us I think at the dinner. If there was a party then I'd know nothing about that........Well I was there so there was a dinner, I don't think it was quite as you might put it but yeah,OK I was there for… I was there at a dinner, yeah.

That'll haunt him on examination in court one day! Apparently Scotland Yard are being kept up to date with the FBI investigation. The MET dropped the previous inquiry but even the former head of the Royal security detail has gone on the record saying there needs to be a public criminal investigation into Prince Andrew to save any integrity the Royals have.

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: pteridine

the youngest of her three disappointments

you are going to have to explain that one

www.townandcountrymag.com...

The 4th child, Edward, does not provide fodder to the gossip sheets. I called the other three disappointments to the Queen.

a reply to: Floridadreamin

Its more to do with the fact we couldnt give a # about all this as to why we'll move on, not because of a class system