| Man found guilty of "violent disorder" for throwing eggs at the king. 14:44 - Apr 14 with 2368 views | noggin |
I wonder if there would have been a court case, had he thrown eggs at a rough sleeper. |  |
| |  |
| Man found guilty of "violent disorder" for throwing eggs at the king. on 15:22 - Apr 14 with 776 views | noggin |
| Man found guilty of "violent disorder" for throwing eggs at the king. on 15:18 - Apr 14 by blueasfook |
Meanwhile his paedo brother lives in luxury and walks free. Justice: Yours dependent on status. |
Mother (the tax payer) paid the pleb to back off. Problem solved. [Post edited 14 Apr 2023 15:22]
| |
| |
| Yes, it's assault..... on 15:22 - Apr 14 with 776 views | ronnyd |
| Yes, it's assault..... on 15:02 - Apr 14 by Zx1988 |
So you truly believe that eggs thrown in the vicinity of anyone else (let's not forget that none of the eggs hit anyone) would result in a court case and conviction?
If that's the case, I've got some magic beans that might be of interest to you. |
What a criminal waste of eggs. Bet he didn't get them at Sainsbury, as they rarely have any at the Bury store. |  | | |
| Yes, it's assault..... on 15:31 - Apr 14 with 754 views | noggin |
| Yes, it's assault..... on 15:06 - Apr 14 by WD19 |
Feels like it is worth an experiment....
If you have got a bit of spare time this afternoon can you please go and hurl 5+ eggs at a rough sleeper and angrily accuse them of being associated with a paedophile. Make sure you do it whilst a police officer is on hand and can see you.....and if they say anything to you then make sure you kick off at them too.......
Then we will know the answer.......... |
What if he was associated with a paedophile and his mother had paid hush money from public funds? Just asking. | |
| |
| Man found guilty of "violent disorder" for throwing eggs at the king. on 15:37 - Apr 14 with 748 views | Guthrum |
| Man found guilty of "violent disorder" for throwing eggs at the king. on 14:46 - Apr 14 by J2BLUE |
When someone wears a crown it's kind of baked in that they get special treatment.
That's why we should remove it along with all of their lands and assets. Then give them £5m each and thank them for their service. |
That's pretty much how the Civil List started. Parliament took control of all the royal lands (along with responsibility for paying for stuff like defence and the income from taxation) in exchange for a regular stipend paid out of the proceeds.
What remans in royal ownership is either stuff they've bought privately since (Balmoral, Sandringham, Highgrove, etc.), or estates that come from other titles absorbed into the Crown over the centuries (Duchy of Lancaster, Duchy of Cornwall, Earldom of Chester, etc.). The latter, while providing revenue, are not personally owned in the same way as the former.
Removing the first category would be problematic (they were purchased in the same way as anybody buys a property) and taking the revenue from the second would be a drop in the ocean of UK national public finances (less than 0.01% of government income). |  |
| |
| Man found guilty of "violent disorder" for throwing eggs at the king. on 15:43 - Apr 14 with 735 views | noggin |
| Man found guilty of "violent disorder" for throwing eggs at the king. on 15:37 - Apr 14 by Guthrum |
That's pretty much how the Civil List started. Parliament took control of all the royal lands (along with responsibility for paying for stuff like defence and the income from taxation) in exchange for a regular stipend paid out of the proceeds.
What remans in royal ownership is either stuff they've bought privately since (Balmoral, Sandringham, Highgrove, etc.), or estates that come from other titles absorbed into the Crown over the centuries (Duchy of Lancaster, Duchy of Cornwall, Earldom of Chester, etc.). The latter, while providing revenue, are not personally owned in the same way as the former.
Removing the first category would be problematic (they were purchased in the same way as anybody buys a property) and taking the revenue from the second would be a drop in the ocean of UK national public finances (less than 0.01% of government income). |
Ah, so they earned the money to buy Balmoral, Sandringham and Highgrove? Imagine the interview with the mortgage rep at Nat West.. | |
| |
| Man found guilty of "violent disorder" for throwing eggs at the king. on 16:20 - Apr 14 with 704 views | Buhrer |
| Man found guilty of "violent disorder" for throwing eggs at the king. on 14:57 - Apr 14 by J2BLUE |
You must have missed the bit where I said take all their assets. |
No saw that, was just staggered at giving the parasites 5 million pounds of public money given if they did f ook off they'll have left the palaces empty, strolling off with pockets full of loot. |  | | |
| Man found guilty of "violent disorder" for throwing eggs at the king. on 16:55 - Apr 14 with 639 views | Crawfordsboot |
| Man found guilty of "violent disorder" for throwing eggs at the king. on 14:48 - Apr 14 by Keno |
to be fair it caused some panic, the special protection officers were scrambled to protect him |
It was simply an attempt to make coronation chicken. |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Man found guilty of "violent disorder" for throwing eggs at the king. on 17:13 - Apr 14 with 620 views | JackNorthStand |
You’d like to think so.
No matter peoples opinions on the monarchy, the person found guilty has essentially thrown eggs at an elderly person in public, it’s not a good look. | | | |
| Man found guilty of "violent disorder" for throwing eggs at the king. on 17:39 - Apr 14 with 607 views | GeoffSentence |
The bloke who egged John Prescott didn't get charged with anything.
On the other hand he did get tw@tted by Prescott. |  |
| |
| Man found guilty of "violent disorder" for throwing eggs at the king. on 18:22 - Apr 14 with 589 views | ronnyd |
| Man found guilty of "violent disorder" for throwing eggs at the king. on 17:39 - Apr 14 by GeoffSentence |
The bloke who egged John Prescott didn't get charged with anything.
On the other hand he did get tw@tted by Prescott. |
Perhaps Charlie should have thrown one (punch) at him. | | | |
| Man found guilty of "violent disorder" for throwing eggs at the king. on 18:32 - Apr 14 with 581 views | HARRY10 |
| Man found guilty of "violent disorder" for throwing eggs at the king. on 18:22 - Apr 14 by ronnyd |
Perhaps Charlie should have thrown one (punch) at him. |
It's a (Royal) knockout, so to speak | | | |
| Man found guilty of "violent disorder" for throwing eggs at the king. on 18:34 - Apr 14 with 582 views | ElderGrizzly |
Yes. The fact they are vulnerable people would see an even tougher response |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
