Valid points, but without seeing the real material we are always supposing. And whilst I am entitled to suppose lol its glaringly obvious to me, this is being spun, only being dealt in part, and there will be higher scalps than Andy. Its all just been so irregular, like where I started, is more borderline entertainment.
AMW is being served up as chaff to protect greater persons.
Reckon if it this ever gets anywhere it will be regards to grift.
Apart from having no jurisdiction 
I thought they changed the laws a few years back to allow UK police to investigate any UK citizen involved in CSA no matter where it happened?
They have no juristiction to arrest him, but nothing to stop them releasing the transcripts of any interviews if Trump were to be mentioned
Not 100% sure, I always thought this was the metro/Scotland yard that did this.
The MET would not be in possession of the entire files, though they will now have redacted copies of what implicates AMW. The police force dont really do what you suggest, but a media outlet is more likely. I dont see how AMW would have evidence against Trump, which rests on the supposition that they were both there at the same times. The MET, like I said, wont be doing anything on Trump. They certainly wont be releasing evidence without charge opening them up to libel actions.
That could be what I was thinking of.
But it doesnât change my original point about whatever police that end up interviewing Andrew releasing any names of non UK citizens to the press. Especially if they think that going through another nations police force may get stonewalled
If they charge him, then he would have to open up all of his emails, phone calls and any other communications through discovery (UK might use a different phrase, but concept would still be the same - all evidence each side gets must be passed onto the other side). So the UK police would end up with any communications mentioning Trump being unredacted - if Andrew has any.
Hang on, did I just read Gordon Brown is somehow involved in spilling the beans on this? WTF is happening?
Yep.
That is for civil law, not necessarily in crime. Neither party really allows the other to see anything, and huge tracts are commonly withheld, unless it assists either sides case. To be honest, you seem to be straining with a point, behind which is the presupposition, that Andrew has material on Trump. I donât think that necessarily follows. But as to your opening hope, no the MET wont be publishing damaging material found from AMW on Trump. If such existed they would pass to US Authorities.
Alternatively, one could say he has the appearance of a man who knows he is well and truly fucked.
I can always take the black and join the Nightâs Watch.
I think this is more inline with his fantasy world.
Thatâs the face of a man who just crashed into reality.
Arrested 5 minutes after he was deprinced by Charlie who was no doubt given the heads up to dump him before they charge him.
May this be the start.
Thought his titles were removed months ago?
Nevertheless, Charlie doin a deal to protect the royals is doubtlessly true.
He is unlikely to have the funds to defend himself in a manner the Royal family are accustomed to⌠and while we are at it, to me anyway, those payments from Epstein to âFergieâ, will not have been free donations as such, but more as an in-direct route to Andrew, OR, for âdigging the dirtâ and supplying background information on the Royal family membersâŚ!
It is a tangled web they weaveâŚ
Question for Royal historians - if CPS do go ahead and prosecute him, what is the closest historical parallel? Charles I getting the chop?
