Jim’s Rant For The Day. Medical Miracle Proves He’s Guilty.
Yesterday the Judge in the upcoming civil rape trial against Prince Andrew took an action that ended in a conviction even though the trial hasn’t convened yet. When the trial begins this week the first order of business is to determine if that court has jurisdiction over the incident (based on location) and if an agreement between the victim and the dead (or not so dead?) Jeffery Epstein prevents a trial.
Confused yet? Let’s play it out. The order laid out yesterday by the judge compelled Andrew to release documents requested by the plaintiff, documents that Andrew has refused to turn over. The judge ordered them released immediately (before Tuesday’s hearing I believe).
The Tyler Durden article states:
“In another document, Andrew’s lawyers acknowledged that they couldn't provide documentary evidence that he has the "inability to sweat", one of the defenses employed by Prince Andrew to try and discredit Guiffre (although the reaction to the claim in the press was one of abject dismissal).”
The above admission by Andrew’s attorneys is the basis for my claim that Andrew has just been found guilty of the rape incident. In a recent rant I said that there will be two trials, the court trial and the public’s perception trial. The latter trial must rule guilty at this point.
The plaintiff, Virginia Giuffre, publicly stated that Andrew “sweated profusely.” In a BBC interview Andrew said he had a medical problem that prevents him from sweating. Therefore, Andrew has raised the believable threshold bar way higher than he can jump. In order for the British subjects to believe him, they must first believe that Jesus laid his hand on Andrew and miraculously cured his sweating ailment, because we all see him sweating like hell now.
Then on top of that, his subjects have to believe Jesus laid his hands on Andrew while Andrew laid his hands on a child! I don’t think the British subjects will buy it, particularly when you appreciate their passion for their history.
Ever heard of “Nobility Night of First Right”? That was the European custom afforded nobility to sleep with a serf’s bride the first night. Was it true? According to Wikipedia it was a wild rumor but we are witnessing our history being scrubbed every day. My guess is some nobility occasionally took advantage and some did not, either sexually or in cash. But again, the fact is immaterial. What matters is the perception of history held by the British subjects.
So for me, Andrew is guilty no matter how the legal show unfolds. I suggest that Giuffre was so beautiful that her beauty killed the British monarchy.