| Biden , Prince Andrew 22:35 - Dec 2 with 1108 views | cressi |
One law for the rich and another law for everyone else.
Biden gives his son a pardon and the royal family buys Andrew a way out, no wonder we have unrest at times. And a crook for a incoming president. A messed up world I'm afraid. |  | | |  |
| Biden , Prince Andrew on 23:39 - Dec 2 with 1035 views | redrickstuhaart |
The two things are not connected.
The US system is bizarre and open to abuse.
Prince Andrew was sued for damages and agreed to pay damages. That is not the same as buying his way out of anything. | | | |
| Biden , Prince Andrew on 23:44 - Dec 2 with 1022 views | StNeotsBlue |
Indeed and I'm beginning to doubt the advice of so called experts. In my quest to hit my target of eating more fruit and veg I ate some mouldy grapes and I've now just sh@t myself.
Nicked from Viz |  | | |
| Biden , Prince Andrew on 08:12 - Dec 3 with 824 views | catch74 |
| Biden , Prince Andrew on 23:39 - Dec 2 by redrickstuhaart |
The two things are not connected.
The US system is bizarre and open to abuse.
Prince Andrew was sued for damages and agreed to pay damages. That is not the same as buying his way out of anything. |
‘Sued for damages and agreed to pay damages’
No - he reached an out of court settlement, so there wasn’t the embarrassment of a trial. This wouldn’t be possible for many people, surely everyone should face trial if we want a fair society.
I guess it’s a more open way of paying someone off, feels crooked to me. |  |
| |
| Biden , Prince Andrew on 08:36 - Dec 3 with 764 views | redrickstuhaart |
| Biden , Prince Andrew on 08:12 - Dec 3 by catch74 |
‘Sued for damages and agreed to pay damages’
No - he reached an out of court settlement, so there wasn’t the embarrassment of a trial. This wouldn’t be possible for many people, surely everyone should face trial if we want a fair society.
I guess it’s a more open way of paying someone off, feels crooked to me. |
An out of court settlement is precisely the act of paying monetary damages in response to a claim for monetary damages.
It is possible for everyone.
Is Argos "crooked" for paying me a refund on faulty goods rather than having a trial? Is an insurance company crooked for paying off a whiplash claim rather than insisting on a trial?
It is precisely how it works, and is supposed to work. | | | |
| Biden , Prince Andrew on 08:51 - Dec 3 with 739 views | Zx1988 |
| Biden , Prince Andrew on 08:36 - Dec 3 by redrickstuhaart |
An out of court settlement is precisely the act of paying monetary damages in response to a claim for monetary damages.
It is possible for everyone.
Is Argos "crooked" for paying me a refund on faulty goods rather than having a trial? Is an insurance company crooked for paying off a whiplash claim rather than insisting on a trial?
It is precisely how it works, and is supposed to work. |
You're conflating two completely different matters there.
Argos and your insurers would pay you because it's their legal obligation - either under the Consumer Rights Act, or the terms of your contract with them.
Prince Nonce was so sure of his innocence that he felt the need to pay £12m to a woman he'd never met, rather than go to court in order to prove said iron-clad innocence.
Two completely different things. | |
| |
| Biden , Prince Andrew on 08:53 - Dec 3 with 729 views | redrickstuhaart |
| Biden , Prince Andrew on 08:51 - Dec 3 by Zx1988 |
You're conflating two completely different matters there.
Argos and your insurers would pay you because it's their legal obligation - either under the Consumer Rights Act, or the terms of your contract with them.
Prince Nonce was so sure of his innocence that he felt the need to pay £12m to a woman he'd never met, rather than go to court in order to prove said iron-clad innocence.
Two completely different things. |
No. I am not conflating anything.
It was a claim for damages. He paid damages. That was a legal obligation (if proven on the balance of probabilities). It was a tort ratehr than contractual, but the principle is identicial. This was not a criminal case. If we have an RTA and my insurers agree to pay you for your repairs, that is not crookedly buying you off. That too, is a "tort". So precisely the same.
It happens all the time and is how the system is supposed to work. The woman claimed an amount of money and then accepted an offer. If she wanted a trial, she could have refused it. Though it would have cost her a fortune, in all likelihood, because you dont take a claim to trial if you have already been offered a sum which is likely to be awarded if you win. [Post edited 3 Dec 2024 8:56]
| | | |
| Biden , Prince Andrew on 08:56 - Dec 3 with 718 views | Zx1988 |
| Biden , Prince Andrew on 08:53 - Dec 3 by redrickstuhaart |
No. I am not conflating anything.
It was a claim for damages. He paid damages. That was a legal obligation (if proven on the balance of probabilities). It was a tort ratehr than contractual, but the principle is identicial. This was not a criminal case. If we have an RTA and my insurers agree to pay you for your repairs, that is not crookedly buying you off. That too, is a "tort". So precisely the same.
It happens all the time and is how the system is supposed to work. The woman claimed an amount of money and then accepted an offer. If she wanted a trial, she could have refused it. Though it would have cost her a fortune, in all likelihood, because you dont take a claim to trial if you have already been offered a sum which is likely to be awarded if you win. [Post edited 3 Dec 2024 8:56]
|
He denied (and continues to deny) that he had ever met the girl, yet paid her £12m.
He was under no obligation to do so at the point at which he stumped up to get her to go away. There is a clear legal obligation for your insurer/Argos to pay out in the circumstances you describe.
Why are you so keen to defend Prince Nonce's decision to pay £12m to a girl he'd never met, let alone abused? | |
| |
| Biden , Prince Andrew on 10:07 - Dec 3 with 644 views | redrickstuhaart |
| Biden , Prince Andrew on 08:56 - Dec 3 by Zx1988 |
He denied (and continues to deny) that he had ever met the girl, yet paid her £12m.
He was under no obligation to do so at the point at which he stumped up to get her to go away. There is a clear legal obligation for your insurer/Argos to pay out in the circumstances you describe.
Why are you so keen to defend Prince Nonce's decision to pay £12m to a girl he'd never met, let alone abused? |
You are simply wrong in your understanding of legal cases.
I will ignore the absurd and defamatory nonsense you closed with. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Biden , Prince Andrew on 12:53 - Dec 3 with 530 views | Pendejo |
| Biden , Prince Andrew on 08:56 - Dec 3 by Zx1988 |
He denied (and continues to deny) that he had ever met the girl, yet paid her £12m.
He was under no obligation to do so at the point at which he stumped up to get her to go away. There is a clear legal obligation for your insurer/Argos to pay out in the circumstances you describe.
Why are you so keen to defend Prince Nonce's decision to pay £12m to a girl he'd never met, let alone abused? |
Because it was cheaper to make it go away than fight it in court.
On a smaller less scandalous scale the company I used to work for used to pay any ex-employee claims less than £5k as it was cheaper than paying for legal advice...
The Prince, of course, is completely innocent and only guilty of being too honourable. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
