uk: 
 berlin. 
 x=1762888139; b= 
 9BEGheZQxBivaI0aBYFlWEn6Rwz 
 Received: 
 From: martinharran@gmail.com 
  
 On Sat, 1 Nov 2025 15:15:13 +0000, JNugent  wrote: 
  
 >On 31/10/2025 02:05 pm, The Todal wrote: 
 >> On 31/10/2025 12:22, Roger Hayter wrote: 
 >>> On 31 Oct 2025 at 11:51:26 GMT, "The Todal"  wrote: 
 >>> 
 >>>> On 31/10/2025 10:22, Martin Brown wrote: 
 >>>>> In the light of recent events involving the residence of the Andrew 
 >>>>> formerly known as a prince I have a question about voiding his lease. 
 >>>>> 
 >>>>> Our village hall is also on a 25 year lease with a peppercorn rent 
 >>>>> (although the peppercorn is a bit bigger at £35 p.a. to cover admin 
 >>>>> costs). The terms of the lease appear to state that provided that we 
 >>>>> look after and maintain the building and don't use it for illegal 
 >>>>> purposes or cause a public nuisance the owner grants us a long fixed 
 >>>>> term of 25 years (previous ones were 50 years each). 
 >>>>> 
 >>>>> If we fail to keep it in tenantable condition then the landlord has the 
 >>>>> right to engage contractors to sort it out and charge that to us. 
 >>>>> 
 >>>>> However, as far as I can see unless we engaged in criminal activities 
 >>>>> *on* the premises or caused a serious public nuisance to our neighbours 
 >>>>> (also their tenants) it is ours to use for the full 25 year lease. 
 >>>>> 
 >>>>> What clause have I missed that allows it to be voided by the landlord? 
 >>>>> IANAL so I can't rule out having missed some clever form of words. 
 >>>>> I had to have "tenantable condition" explained to me by our solicitors. 
 >>>>> 
 >>>>> So my main question is: how has the King forced his brother out of what 
 >>>>> is very probably a water tight fixed term lease on Royal Lodge? 
 >>>>> 
 >>>>> Or is that a prerogative of being an absolute monarch? 
 >>>>> 
 >>>> 
 >>>> Is Andrew's lease in the public domain? 
 >>>> 
 >>>> It would be absolutely wonderful if Andrew sued the King for breach of 
 >>>> contract and for a declaration that his lease is valid and cannot be 
 >>>> terminated without his consent. 
 >>>> 
 >>>> With all the real problems faced by our nation and by the world I find 
 >>>> it incredible that the media are so preoccupied with the humiliation of 
 >>>> Andrew and the King's supposedly sensible and courageous decision to 
 >>>> deprive Andrew of his title and hereditary honours. Just in time to 
 >>>> forestall any decision in the House of Commons which might have given 
 >>>> the impression that Charles is on the back foot, unable to make 
 >>>> decisions about his family. 
 >>>> 
 >>>> There is really nothing less important than Andrew losing the title of 
 >>>> Prince (the artist formerly known as Prince) and losing his big house. 
 >>>> It's a soap opera to distract the plebs from more important issues. 
 >>>> 
 >>>> If and when Andrew commits suicide because of the public disgrace, what 
 >>>> will be the press and public reaction then?  Will he become the Prince 
 >>>> of Hearts and will acres of bouquets be laid in the grounds of 
 >>>> Sandringham? Or will the verdict be "good riddance, if I'd had my way 
 >>>> he'd have had his head chopped off".  So perish all royal princes who 
 >>>> fuck prostitutes and keep undesirable company with unscrupulous rich 
 >>>> playboys. Is it now time for someone to deprive Trump of the title of 
 >>>> President and move him out of the White House? 
 >>> 
 >>> I thought we had come to realise that vulnerable young women 
 >>> trafficked and 
 >>> sexually exploited were not primarily "prostitutes" so much as 
 >>> victims? Or 
 >>> does this analysis only apply when the exploiters are Pakistanis? 
 >>> 
 >>> 
 >> 
 >> You make a valid point. 
 >> 
 >> Conversely, it is no longer fashionable to see prostitutes as inevitably 
 >> the victims of coercion, threatened with violence by pimps, longing to 
 >> be rescued from their plight as fallen women and rehabilitated into a 
 >> more worthy way of making a living. Objects of pity. William Ewart 
 >> Gladstone used to wander the streets and befriend prostitutes and pray 
 >> with them in the hope that they would see the error of their ways and 
 >> return to a more respectable way of life, perhaps as housemaids or cooks. 
 >> 
 >> Virginia Giuffre was a victim of sexual abuse long before she met 
 >> Epstein, and she was therefore vulnerable and susceptible to 
 >> manipulation. But very well rewarded financially by Epstein. Many women 
 >> would regard her as a very underserving recipient of royal compensation. 
 >> She was, objectively, a prostitute. It is said that she recruited other 
 >> girls into the fold. Can she be absolved of all responsibility? 
 >> 
 >> But the main point of all this is, she was a victim of Epstein and 
  
 [continued in next message] 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)