The Steeple Times

Category: MOVERS & SHAKERS

The snakes and ladders of society.

A chronicle of drama, scandal and success in London, Paris, New York and elsewhere

  • “Stupid” Randy Andy – The No Longer Grand Old Duke of York

    “Stupid” Randy Andy – The No Longer Grand Old Duke of York

    After Jeffrey Epstein victims’ lawyer Brad Edwards labels Prince Andrew “stupid” at CrimeCon in Las Vegas, ‘The Steeple Times’s’ Matthew Steeples looks forward to discussing the ratbag royal and mucky madam Ghislaine Maxwell’s fate at CrimeCon London in June

    On Sunday, The Sun quoted Brad Edwards, Esq. – a crusading lawyer for 69 victims of the croaked paedophile Jeffrey Epstein and a founding partner of Fort Lauderdale, Florida based Edwards Pottinger LLC – as describing Prince Andrew as “stupid” and someone who is “going to have to live a life of ridicule for a long time.”

     

    Going further and making somewhat punchy comments to the paper’s Alex Diaz whilst at the recent CrimeCon event in Las Vegas, Mr Edwards added:

     

    “How stupid can you possibly be to remain friends with Jeffrey Epstein after he was labeled a sex offender and he came out of jail? Have you lost your mind? I imagine the Queen has bent him over her knee a couple of times.”

     

    “He paid a lot of money to settle a case and try to make up for what he allegedly did many years ago.”

     

    “I just wish that in the process, Virginia didn’t have to take the media hit that she did because he was trying to cover his own butt.”

     

    “He should have just accepted responsibility and moved on.”

     

    “A lot of people would hope that the Queen had banished him, but if your own mom’s not going to love you then nobody will.”

     

    Edwards – who was honoured by the New York Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children in November 2020 – was targeted by Epstein and in April 2020 told Page Six that during meetings at a Starbucks in Boca Raton, Florida, the financier told him: “Brad, if you keep prosecuting me in this way, somebody’s going to get hurt.”

     

    Page Six continued: “[Edwards] revealed: “[Epstein] put my family under surveillance, when I called him on it and said, ‘Hey, you put my family under surveillance, you told me you weren’t a bad guy,’ he said, ‘No, no, I just took you off the surveillance – I didn’t realise I had done that. I have a bunch of people who work for me, so see I’m the good guy, I’ll treat you fairly, let’s settle this case.’”

     

    The attorney refused to settle and in due course Epstein was “finally forced to make a full apology in a letter read in court in 2018.”

     

    Continuing exploration of such matters, The Steeple Times’ Matthew Steeples will spend an hour discussing his research into the crimes and connections of not only Jeffrey Epstein but also Ghislaine Maxwell at CrimeCon UK in London on 12th June with YouTube True Crime Channel host and author Shaun Attwood and his podcaster co-host Jennifer Hopkins.

     

    Delving also into Attwood’s 2021 book Who Killed Epstein? and Prince Andrew’s recent settlement with Virginia Roberts, in addition, the trio will turn in the wake of last week’s nigh on 4-hour documentary epic Untouchable take questions about the antics of another royal rotter – the monstrous paedophile and necrophiliac, Sir Jimmy Savile – given that show has attracted an astonishing 120,000 views since it premiered.

     

    Speaking of the forthcoming event, Matthew Steeples remarked Tuesday:

     

    “I am looking forward to being able to return to CrimeCon London after speaking there in September 2021 on the subject of the pension pot plunderer’s deviant daughter and her coterie of evil cohorts.”

     

    “Last year, it was great to spend time with everyone from the punchy storyteller behind the Hunting Ghislaine podcast, John Sweeney, to crime enthusiasts who’d travelled from far and wide because of their interest in the Epstein-Maxwell case and others both Shaun and I’ve covered including the incarceration of Jeremy Bamber and ‘missing’ Madeleine McCann.”

     

    “Last year’s audience for our segment was somewhat small given the size of the room, but with the anticipation of sentencing of Maxwell on the 28th June and a much larger space, I look forward to sharing the stories of my experiences with the key players, both for and against this wicked, now rightly shamed socialite, on 12th June.”

     

    Matthew Steeples will be discussing the sordid stories of Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell, Prince Andrew and Sir Jimmy Savile with Shaun Attwood and Jennifer Hopkins at CrimeCon UK on 12th June from 11am to 12 noon at the Leonardo Royal Hotel & Spa, St Paul’s, 10 Godliman Street, EC4V 5AJ.

     

    To book tickets to CrimeCon London 2022 partnered by CBS Reality, click here and use the discount code ATTWOOD to get 10% off ticket prices. The weekend event runs over two days from 11th to 12th June 2022.

     

    Brad Edwards Edwards Pottinger
    The Fort Lauderdale based lawyer for Jeffrey Epstein’s victims, Brad Edwards, has been pursuing the cases of those sexually molested by the taxi driver turned teacher turned sex offender on a pro bono basis for the past decade.
    CrimeCon London Matthew Steeples Shaun Attwood
    Shaun Attwood with co-host Jennifer Hopkins will discuss “two of the biggest stories in true crime” on 12th June 2022 between 11am and 12 noon at the UK’s number one gathering of those interested in true crime in Britain and beyond.
    CrimeCon London 2022
  • Carrie Doesn’t Live Here Anymore – PM Wife Missing 2022

    Carrie Doesn’t Live Here Anymore – PM Wife Missing 2022

    It seems “Carrie doesn’t live here anymore” has become the likely fate of Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s currently missing wine chucking puppet mistress as “Where is Carrie Johnson?” trends on Twitter

    Conspicuously absent even before her spokesperson shared that she “apologises unreservedly” for breaching lockdown rules in a statement on 12th April, the Prime Minister’s latest ‘baby mama’s’ is on the missing list.

     

    The wench formerly known as Miss Symonds did not even emerge last Thursday to accompany her husband to vote in the local elections and in turn social media has gone into overdrive asking: “Where is Carrie Johnson?”

     

    Speculation online has been wild and aside from suggestions that she might have gone off to her mates in Russia, other most likely far-fetched ideas number that:

     

    • She’s run off with her ex-lover Oliver Haiste.
    • She’s discovered Boris Johnson having an affair with a cabinet colleague and having chucked more wine at him, moved out.
    • Gone off to rescue the convicted sex offender and mucky madam Ghislaine Maxwell; Miss Maxwell used to fund Mrs Johnson’s onetime employers, the Oceana charity.
    • Defected to support Labour and Sir Keir Starmer.
    • It wasn’t Rishi Sunak’s removal van that visited Downing Street recently, but instead hers.
    • Been put in rehab; she does have a history of chucking wine and the police being called.
    • Moved in with her husband’s arch nemesis Dominic Cummings.
    • Gone organic dining with Lady ‘Doors To Manual’ Bamford – whose firm supplied her with £27,000 worth of organic nosh during the 2020 lockdowns.
    • Been mauled to death by her aggressive terrier, Dilyn.
    • Been buried Brookside style under the ‘Partygate’ patio in the Downing Street garden.
    • Turned her ‘Chatty Rat’ ABBA dancing chum Henry Newman straight.
    • Sailed away with The Right Honourable The Lord Lebedev of Hampton in the London Borough of Richmond upon Thames and of Siberia in the Russian Federation.
    • Gone decorating with Lulu Lytle; her of ‘Wallpapergate’ fame.
    • And finally, been taken away by creepy Christian crooner Sir Cliff Richard – whose 1979 hit was all about someone of her name having gone missing.

     

    Rather like a future line of inquiry for the Where’s Wally? series, the mystery of what has happened to Prime Minister’s current wife remains an open investigation.

     

    Pictured top – Cliff Richard showing photos of his missing ‘conquest’ in the video for ‘Carrie’ (left) and a mocked-up image of a Metropolitan Police missing persons’ poster featuring the former Miss Symonds that has been doing the rounds on Twitter (right).

     

    Reactions To Boris Johnson’s Wife Going Missing on Twitter

    Tweet 1
    Tweet 2
    Tweet 3
    Tweet 4
    Tweet 5

    Sir Cliff Richard’s Creepy 1979 Song

    Released in December 1979 as the third single lifted from the Rock ‘n’ Roll Juvenile album, ‘Carrie’ reached number four in the UK Singles Chart and “became an international hit.”

     

    It was written by Terry Britten and Brian A. Robertson and of it the latter once remarked: “The strength of the song comes from the fact that you’re never quite sure what it’s about. You don’t know whether Carrie is homeless or whether she’s squatting or what. You don’t know whether Cliff, as the narrator, is the husband, boyfriend, lover, brother or father. Nowhere does the song say what the relationship with Carrie is. It’s very mysterious and musically it falls in the same groove as ‘I Heard It Through The Grapevine.’”

     

    Taking an alternative view, AllMusic journalist Dave Thompson suggested of the song: “[It’s] a deliberately sinister and enthrallingly atmospheric number… [It] could sound trite” whilst the crackpot crooner ‘Cliffy’ himself told The Mail on Sunday of it in November 2008:

     

    “It’s a mysterious song because you never really know what it’s about. A guy turns up in the neighborhood asking where Carrie is. The very last line goes: ‘Carrie doesn’t live, doesn’t live…’ You’re left thinking: ‘Is she dead? Has she been murdered?’”

     

    Sorry to disturb you

    But I was in the neighborhood

    About a friend, I’ve her picture

    Could you take a look?

     

    Oh, I appreciate you’re busy

    And time is not your own

    Yeah, maybe it would be better

    If I telephoned

     

    Carrie doesn’t live here anymore

    (Carrie)

    Carrie used to room on the second floor

    (On the second)

    Sorry that she left no forwarding address

    That was known to me

     

    So, Carrie doesn’t live here anymore

    (Carrie)

    You could always ask at the corner store

    (Could ask)

    Carrie had a date with her own kind of fate

    It’s plain to see

     

    Another missing person

    One of many we assume

    The young wear their freedom

    Like cheap perfume

     

    Returning my call

    (To help the situation)

    They’ve nothing at all

    You’re just another message

    On a pay phone wall

     

    Carrie doesn’t live here anymore

    (Carrie)

    Carrie used to room on the second floor

    (On the second)

    Sorry that she left no forwarding address

    That was known to me, Carrie

     

    Carrie doesn’t live here anymore

    (Carrie doesn’t live, doesn’t live here anymore)

    Carrie used to room on the second floor

    (On the second)

    Sorry, Carrie left no forwarding address

    It’s a mystery

     

  • Fergie Needs To Explain – Jeffrey Epstein Loan

    Fergie Needs To Explain – Jeffrey Epstein Loan

    Aside from showing audacity in wearing shoes featuring the words ‘Never Complain’ and ‘Never Explain’ after her ex-husband’s £12 million payout to a woman he claimed to have never met, isn’t it time that Sarah, Duchess of York confirms if she ever paid the paedophile Jeffrey Epstein back?

    Yesterday, Richard Eden – the Daily Mail’s venerable diarist – decided to mention that Sarah, Duchess of York had been spotted at Oswald’s in Mayfair wearing a pair of slippers featuring the words ‘Never Complain’ and ‘Never Explain.’

     

    Repeating that story yet again this morning, the apologist for amongst others the paedophile Rolf Harris, in her frankly tedious weekly column, the harpy and harridan that is Amanda Platell added that she thinks that “[the woman formerly known as Sarah Ferguson] might want to explain why she took £20,000 for advising a Northern Ireland caravan tycoon embroiled in allegations of money laundering on top of a £225,000 separate payment. Caravans? Has she ever set foot in one?”

     

    Both columnists might note that Hello! first referenced Prince Andrew’s live-in ex-wife’s ludicrous footwear as “different, but cool” in May 2019 and that The Steeple Times featured Fergie’s other ‘feet-related incidents’ in July 2021 – amongst them that infamous “toe-sucking incident” and the time that she blamed the late Diana, Princess of Wales for catching verrucas.

     

    Equally, aside from having a pop at the definite dimwit over the money she took from Alphabet Capital and the £232,000 she owes to “Chinese investors,” it is time that the mainstream media dealt with a far more serious matter. Sarah, Duchess of York has never confirmed whether she repaid the loan and “further assistance” she took from the since croaked paedophile Jeffrey Epstein and it is now time to remind her that without an answer, she simply continues to bring shame on the already shamed House of York.

     

    Sarah Ferguson Ghislaine Maxwell
    One is left wondering if Sarah, Duchess of York (pictured here with her deservedly since convicted sex offender mucky madam mate Ghislaine Maxwell) spent any of the money she got from the paedophile, sex trafficker of children Jeffrey Epstein on shoes.
    Sarah Ferguson footwear verruca Never Complain Never Explain
    That this wastrel woman thinks it appropriate to speak about the late Diana, Princess of Wales giving her verrucas and wearing footwear that basically is an “up yours” to the victims of her ex-husband’s ‘bestie’ Jeffrey Epstein is beyond outrageous, but what is worse is that she has no shame in taking money from the dastardly, the deviant and the deranged.
    Sarah Ferguson toe sucking
    On Thursday 20th August 1992, the ‘Daily Mirror’ shared what they called “the pictures they didn’t want you to see.” In them, a topless Duchess of York was shown having her toes sucked in the South of France by a Texan millionaire named John Bryan. Of the incident, the ‘Mirror’ later reported: “Royal writer Richard Kay claimed in the ‘Daily Mail’ that he received a message via pager from Princess Diana the night before the photos hit the newspaper stands. Diana’s message was simple: ‘The redhead’s in trouble.’”
    Sarah, Duchess of York’s support for the Duchess of Sussex is another example of her backing the wrong horse. Referencing footwear, the feckless live-in ex of ‘Randy Andy’ once remarked: “It must be hard for Meghan and can I relate to her. I believe she is modern and fabulous. She was famous before. She is great. Why can’t Meghan be great? Why can’t she be celebrated? I have been in Meghan’s shoes, and I still am. There’s always a twist of negativity and it just gets so sad and tiring… I abhor bullying and I feel desperately sorry for the pain they must be going through.
    In 2018, the mother of Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie had a temper tantrum on ’60 Minutes Australia’ when questioned about seeking out cash from what she clearly must have known to be illegitimate sources.

    The Weird Words of “Greedy” and “Needy” Sarah, Duchess of York

    Of sex, her and goats: “One of the worst headlines said 82% [of the population] would rather sleep with a goat than Fergie. It’s never left me.”

    Of the royal family: “They tried to put the little redhead in a cage.”

    Of her life: “I have been in the gutter.”

    Of food, family and dining: “As long as it is hot, wet and goes down the right way, it’s fine with me.”

    “With every smell, I smell food. With every sight, I see food. I can almost hear food. I want to spade the whole lot through my mouth at Mach 2. Basta!”

    “We all sit round the table and eat together. Andrew and I believe in total parent unity. We’re best friends.”

    Of wanting to be a television star: “I would quite like to go on Dancing With The Stars. I would like somebody to teach me to tango. I do know the show and my children would be so proud of me.”

    Of when she decided she wanted to bag a royal: “I met [Prince Andrew] when I was 12, and I said: ‘I’m going to marry him.’”

    Of marriage, divorce and work: “I left my marriage knowing I’d have to work. I have.”

    “I didn’t want a divorce, but had to because of circumstance.”

    “I wish we’d never got divorced. He and I both wish we’d never divorced, but we did. I wish I could go back and be the bride again, but I can’t.”

    Of her many, many mistakes: “I felt that I ostracised myself by my behaviour, by the past, by living with all the regrets of my mistakes, that I sort of wore a hair shirt and beat myself up most of the day thinking and regretting why did I make such a mistake. Why have I made so many mistakes?”

    “You look at the devil in the face, which you do. Then you forgive, and you say: ‘OK, I’ve made almost a mistake that will never be forgotten,’ and forgive.”

    “I was so out of control with desperation… I was looking for quick fixes in the places I wouldn’t normally look… I’ve been a huge, over-trusting, idiotic, stupid woman that went to look for the perfect situation, and that’s all I can say really.”

  • Depp v Maxwell –Trial Media Coverage Differences

    Depp v Maxwell –Trial Media Coverage Differences

    Matthew Steeples suggests those moaning that Ghislaine Maxwell’s trial should have been covered by the media in the same way as Johnny Depp’s libel suit do not understand the differences between the two cases; there is simply no “conspiracy” or “cover-up” going on here

    In April 2014, whilst promoting the film Transcendence, Johnny Depp remarked: “People get famous now for I-don’t-know-what.” He was right and the level of interest in both his British and American court appearances and that of Ghislaine Maxwell’s 2021 trial have provided opportunity for goodness only knows how much of the dirty linen of famous faces to be grubbily bandied around.

     

    Now, amongst others ‘blue ticked’ on Twitter Nick Adams, a “four-time best-selling author” and presidential appointee in the Trump administration, are rather stupidly asking: “Why didn’t the Ghislaine Maxwell trial have the same transparency as the Johnny Depp trial?”

     

    Many others – including some you’d clearly expect better of – go further and ludicrously suggest it to be a “conspiracy” that Maxwell’s criminal trial wasn’t aired on television, whilst Depp’s civil trial of libel allegations has been. Quite rightly, however, this week AP News’s Angelo Fichera called out this “widely shared misinformation” for what it truly is – sheer claptrap and utter baloney.

     

    As was also pointed out by the crusading author of Ghislaine Maxwell: An Unauthorized Biography Kirby Sommers on Twitter also, the Maxwell matter was held in a federal court and “federal courts do not allow cameras like some state courts do.” Depp’s civil suit, meanwhile, is taking place in a county circuit court and as, Fichera adds, “that court court does allow photo and video with a judge’s permission.”

     

    Frankly, it is as simple as that and the “Conservative activist” who Fichera quoted who tweeted: “Sooooo, the Johnny Depp trial can be live streamed but the Maxwell trial can’t? Make that make sense” really ought to just learn to keep up.

     

    Whilst many of us, myself included, would very much liked to have watched the mucky madam and daughter of a pension pot plundering and wartime murderer squirm before the cameras as she was convicted, the rules are the rules and there simply was no “gag order” in the case of Ghislaine Maxwell.

     

    Pictured top – Though both now internationally known, the legal matters that this acclaimed actor and this notorious sex trafficking mucky madam are now forever linked to are being handled by the American legal system quite correctly. One was dealt with in a federal court whilst the other is a civil matter and that is exactly why media coverage – including most pertinently video footage – of these cases has been not-allowed and allowed respectively.

     

     

    Kirby Sommers
    Crusading author Kirby Sommers very accurately summed up the differences between the two cases in a tweet shared on 22nd April 2022. It pointed out the differences between “federal” and “civil” case and ended: “Please learn the difference.”
    Dame Brigitte Gabriel
    Self-anointed “quintessential example of a 21st American Dream story” and one-time news anchor ‘Dame’ Brigitte Gabriel – a “survivor of terrorism” and “NYT best-selling author” told her 435,800 Twitter followers: “The media live streams the Johnny Depp trial and not the Ghislaine Maxwell trial because they think we’re stupid” on 23rd April. Clearly, ‘Dame’ Brigitte ought to be sent to a school in fact checking and learn she’s been duped by what Donald Trump might term “fake news, fake news.”
    Shane Hazel
    Equally, 2022 Republican candidate for Governor of Georgia Shane Hazel is another fine example of a boorish berk who doesn’t get it. He tweeted: “When the news covers Johnny Depp 24/7 but didn’t say shit about Epstein & Ghislaine Maxwell you can be sure it’s because American billionaires are molesting kids” on 22nd April. Mr Hazel has an astonishing 38,900 followers; followers he’s clearly misleading whilst at the same time running for high office.
    Trial differences
    Those claiming to be “kept in the dark” about the criminal trial of the late paedophile Jeffrey Epstein’s one-time lover and co-conspirator in sex trafficking whilst banging on about the live-streaming of an actor’s libel action simply do not understand that there is no conspiracy going on in terms of how media coverage of such matters is handled.
    Tweets 1
    Twitter users have gone utterly bonkers about this, let’s be frank, non-issue. Live-streaming is allowed in some courts and it is not in others and those screaming “conspiracy” and “cover-up” from the rooftops on this subject simply need to accept that there was no “gag-order” in the case of media coverage of the pension pot plunderer’s daughter’s December 2021 trial in New York.
    Tweet 5
    Continuing, the anything but rational Twitterati claimed “money doesn’t talk, it shuts everyone up” whilst others suggested “LMAO” of how the French born associate of amongst others Jean-Luc Brunel, the Duke of York and Harvey Weinstein “couldn’t be recorded” whilst the ‘Pirates of the Caribbean’s’ legal case can.
    Tweet 4
    Amongst words used of the two matters were “distractions” and “should tell you all you need to know.” Wallaby killer Russell Brand even got a mention.
    Tweet 3
    The very same conspiracy theorists claimed also a “media blackout” in the 2021 case whilst the 2022 one “live-streamed for all to see.” One argued: “You can clearly see the media’s agenda here” and another added: “I know which one I care about the most.” Others brought up their thoughts on Ukraine, Hunter Biden and his father, 46th President of the United States of America Joe Biden. Here are people who believe the current coverage is “a joke” yet here also are people who cannot accept that the mucky madam’s trial was heard in a federal court in New York – a place where cameras simply are not allowed to be present.
    Tweets 2
    “Something stinks” and “hush hush” claimed one Scot named Gordon Cameron of what he and countless others on social media believe to be a case lacking in transparency of Maxwell’s trial. He and those like him would do better to ask why none of those that the decidedly deviant mucky madam supplied her victims to have yet been brought before the justice system. As the cook and football club owner Delia Smith once slurred (whilst drunk admittedly): “Come on, let’s be ‘avin ya.”
    The libel case brought by the star of ‘The Tourist’ against his ex-wife Amber Heard has descended into moments of comedy and mirth. It is completely the antithesis of the trial of the one-time lover of Prince Andrew – a trial in which victims of sex trafficking and abuse by the powerful and the privileged was very clearly highlighted. Shamefully, however, none of those other powerful and privileged individuals have yet been brought to book. With sentencing due on the 28th June in the Maxwell case, one can only hope that justice will finally be served on the other evil parties who’ve still to this day remained under the radar.
  • Sod Off Scobie! Omid Scobie Gets New Gig At Yahoo!

    Sod Off Scobie! Omid Scobie Gets New Gig At Yahoo!

    The appointment of the PR peddling pillock Omid Scobie to ‘Royal Executive Editor’ at ‘Yahoo! News’ is just yet another own goal by the wicked wench formerly known as Meghan Markle; it is time this sop was simply told to “sod off!”

    Self-anointed know-all Omid Scobie is rather like his nickname ‘Scabies’ in that he has become an infestation that burrows into the skin and has caused an irritating rash to form. He is unwelcome everywhere and that he’s set his troll squad on everyone from the Daily Mail’s Richard Eden to the wonderful Welsh warbling YouTuber Sadie Quinlan (AKA ‘Yankee Wally’) simply reflects his own rotten-to-his-core persona.

     

    This pointless PR peddler and anything but a genuine journalist has long been known more simply as a tin banger for the Duchess of Sussex and her moaning drip of a husband. Now, however, with his ‘elevation’ to becoming the “Royal Executive Editor” (in capitals, of course) for Yahoo! News just gives this windbag wazzock another space in which to whinge and whine.

     

    A former hanger-out in naff nightclubs with the lowbrow ‘glamour model’ that is Jodie Marsh in his days at the equally lowbrow Heat gossip magazine in days past, Scobie used his first column for Yahoo! News to have a pop at everyone in the royal family except the money motivated minx who uses him like a puppet.

     

    In his first “5-minute read” for the online only title – which frankly if produced in printed form wouldn’t even make tomorrow’s chip papers – the Sussex Squaddie chieftan’s continual references to such things as “pearl clutching,” “faux outrage” and “hysteria” about the Sussexes “on the royal beat” simply prove that he is anything but capable of making a rational or indeed reasoned analysis.

     

    Never known to have produced an unbiased story about the mistress he is so devoted to, Scobie ludicrously claims in his ‘article’ that Prince Harry’s vicious attack on his grandmother’s staff “had everyone (including Downing Street) rushing for the smelling salts” and laughably added: “As someone who got closest to the story of Harry’s royal departure, it was certainly not my first thought.”

     

    Firstly, not many would consider Scobie a “thinking man” and secondly, it wasn’t this potless prick that clenched an interview with the royal rotters that are the ‘Modern Day Mr & Mrs Simpson.’ Did they go running to him when they wanted to give an interview? No, they most certainly did not and “why was this?” some might ask. Well, given the woman formerly known as Meghan Markle is utterly money motivated, with Scobie, where, indeed, is the money?

     

    Pitching himself as on a par with Oprah Winfrey is certainly laughable, but in claiming his “I remember how my jaw dropped when a friend of the couple gave me a play-by-play account of how the Queen’s private secretary, Edward Young, went out of his way to prevent the couple from visiting the monarch in Sandringham,” this wannabe and anything but jovial jester to the court of ‘MeGain’ simply shows himself as deranged and delusional.

     

    Going further, in saying “inside the institution of the monarchy is an environment where mental health and wellbeing is not prioritised,” this ‘woke warrior’ is only attempting to draw himself and to promote his bargain-bucket, bag-of-bilge ‘book’ Finding Freedom.

     

    Tellingly, this totally biased ‘article’ ends with a pointed attack on the royal family with the words: “When you look at the famously unsympathetic institution the Queen lives within, Harry has every reason to worry” and then a very relevant sentence: “Buckingham Palace declined to comment to Yahoo News UK.” Miaow.

     

    Scobie, like scabies, should learn that he’s not wanted; it’s now time for him to simply sod off.

     

    Pictured top – The new “Royal Executive Editor” (left) and the woman who is his puppet mistress with the drip that is her husband, the Duchess of Sussex (right).

     

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qF50LFyJHTA
    In other equally vicious comments, ‘Scabies’ shamelessly had a pop at the Queen’s much-loved dresser on behalf of his mistress. He ridiculously remarked: “Angela Kelly, who multiple sources told me made it almost impossible for Meghan to have a necessary ‘hair trial’ with her chosen wedding tiara – even standing up the duchess-to-be and her hairstylist, who had flown in especially, at a pre-scheduled fitting. Harry, sources said, felt it was a cruel attempt to put his partner ‘in her place.’” This is not journalism, it is simply gossip reported by a ghastly guffawing goon.
    Tweet 1
    The ‘Finding Freedom’ author’s attacks on amongst others ‘Yankee Wally’ are indicative only of a moronic meddler determined to get attention for himself. Here is a mouth-not-a-man who’ll do anything to keep himself in the favour of the mendacious minx from Montecito.
    Tweet 2
    Attacking everyone in the royal family other than his meal ticket that consists only of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex is the only way for this buffoon to continue to get media moments.
    Sussex Squad
    Aiding this anything but impartial prat on social media are trolls including ‘Unstoppable-Chi’ and ‘Gin Perdide.’ These ‘people’ and the likes of the Bot Sentinel bore that is Christopher Bouzy are vicious and vile.
    The self-serving, plastic-not-fantastic PR peddler bragged about his new gig on Twitter and shared his first ludicrous headline: “Why Prince Harry has every reason to ask questions about the people around the Queen” with his 82,600 followers. In another tweet, the cretinous creep added: “Excited to start a new content partnership with Yahoo! News, one of the world’s most read outlets. As Executive Royal Editor, I’ll be working with @YahooNewsUK on original podcasting, video content, and giving my unfiltered take on the big royal stories every week. Let’s go!” Most would be delighted if he’d indeed: “Just go!”
  • The Thief, His Wife and the Canoe

    The Thief, His Wife and the Canoe

    ITV1’s ‘The Thief, His Wife and the Canoe’ is a must watch; it recasts the narrative of the 2002 disappearance of John Darwin and shows his wife as an under the thumb woman manipulated into fraud – just as said 71-year-old fraudster has supposedly headed off to Ukraine to fight

    Whilst the disappearance of Lord Lucan on 8th November 1974 and the disappearance of Madeleine McCann on 3rd May 2007 are perhaps the two best known examples of disappearances of British citizens, the story of how the fraudster John Darwin went missing on 21st March 2002 is certainly up there in the league of “most famous British missing persons’ cases.”

     

    Highlighted again now – after the first two episodes of ITV1’s The Thief, His Wife and the Canoe aired on Sunday and Monday – is an example of a modern-day Walter Mitty. John Darwin, the primary subject of the series, was a father of two, former teacher, prison officer and a wannabe business tycoon and he was someone with a penchant for living well and truly beyond his means.

     

    After accumulating vast debts after buying up 12 houses to run as bedsits and a Range Rover with a personalised numberplate also, Mr Darwin concocted a plan to make it appear he’d drowned at sea and then have his wife, Anne, claim life insurance policies to clear their debts and help them start a new life free of their financial shackles.

     

    The four-hour ITV drama – written by Unforgotten creator Chris Lang and starring Eddie Marsan and Monica Dolan as John and Anne Darwin – whilst slammed by some for having accents “insulting” to people from Hartlepool is truly worth watching.

     

    In it, whilst John Darwin is rightly portrayed as a true deviant and all-round nasty piece of toerag, his wife is shown to be an under-the-thumb and bullied woman who goes along with the plan because she has a genuine fear of what would happen to her if she doesn’t.

     

    Controlled totally by a man who once supposedly told her only friend that he only allowed her out on voting day, here is a woman who clearly did wrong and clearly orchestrated much of their fraud because her husband was supposedly dead. Here also, ironically, is a woman whose jail sentence was 3 months longer than that of her then husband.

     

    Whilst the real Anne Darwin served her time and is said to be making amends with her two sons, in March, the MailOnline reported that her now ex-husband’s new wife, Mercy Mae Avila Darwin, 48, had told the press that he was “on his way to Ukraine” to fight and ironically had “good life insurance.” The second Mrs Darwin, who runs clothing businesses in Manila, bizarrely remarked of the danger the now 71-year-old will face: “He will have a bullet proof vest… Dangerous for the Russian when he shoot them.”

     

    Of her husband, Anne Darwin once remarked: “He’s got such a good memory. The problem is he was never satisfied with what he had. He always had ideas above his station. He wanted to be grander than he was.” She sums him up perfectly and after watching this show, I, for one, will say that whilst the rotter John Darwin deserves to go down in history as a truly awful specimen, his now ex-wife is a prime example of why second chances should be allowed.

     

    To watch the full four-hour, four episode series, click here.

     

    Pictured top – The then supposedly dead John and his then still wife Anne in Panama in 2006. The photograph had been discovered when a member of the public searched for the words ‘John,’ ‘Anne’ and ‘Panama’ in Google Images. The photo had been featured on the website movetopanama.com and was brought to the attention of the ‘Daily Mirror’ and the Cleveland Police.

     

    TV drama
    Eddie Marsan and Monica Dolan star as the conman and his wife in the ITV drama.
    John Darwin
    Mercy May is said to be bankrolling her husband by sub-letting her market stall and running another shop in Manilla. The conman is supposedly living off his British state pension.
    Anne Darwin
    Of Anne Darwin (pictured recently above), ‘The Guardian’s’ Stuart Jeffries remarked: “’John was the sort of man,’ Anne Darwin tells us in voiceover early in this drama, ‘who would buy a Range Rover we couldn’t afford and then spend £3,000 on a personalised number plate.’ We all know that sort of man. Perhaps you’re married to him. If so – and while I’m not a professional marriage counsellor – my advice is: pack a bag and never look back. Instead, like a more tragicomic Tammy Wynette, Anne stood by her man. Until she could stand him no more, that is. The big question asked… is why it took her so long.”
  • It’s NOT “Duchess Meghan”

    It’s NOT “Duchess Meghan”

    In constantly referencing the Duchess of Sussex as “Duchess Meghan,” PR peddler and arse-licker Omid Scobie proves himself anything but an expert on royalty, titles, honours and protocol

    If you’d believe the twaddle on his Twitter handle, Omid Scobie is supposedly some kind of expert on all things royal. Here is someone who shares “positive vibes only” – please pass the sick bag – and laughably claims to be a “bestselling author.”

     

    If you then turn to reality, you’ll find – as Nikolay Kalinin revealed on these pages in July 2021 – Omid Scobie is in fact instead a pompous prattler who used to hang out with ‘glamour models’ such as Jodie Marsh. He’s anything but a real journalist and is in fact nothing but a wannabe spin doctor whose Twitter following is composed of at least 25% fake accounts.

     

    Botoxed to a point that he actually looks rather like the wench formerly known as Meghan Markle, Scobie is what one might call a ‘groupie’ and in constantly referencing Prince Charles’ second son’s wife as “Duchess Meghan,” he attempts to show familiarity and kinship with the former actress. He is, however, completely wrong and whatever one might wish to call the mendacious minx who may have been married twice or may have been married three times perhaps, it’s most certainly not “Duchess Meghan.”

     

    Whilst it must be remembered that the Duchess of Sussex – as she unfortunately is still correctly known in spite of her and her husband having renounced any kind of royal responsibilities – was forced to apologise over her cooperation with Scobie at the Appeal Court in London in November 2021, the co-author of the bargain bin confined Finding Freedom does, like her also, like to cause a ruckus at any opportunity.

     

    Whether having a pop at the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge over “palace diversity,” as he did during the couple’s recent visit to Jamaica, or making false claims about Sadie Quinlan (AKA ‘Yankee Wally’), here is someone with a clear chip on his shoulder.

     

    Faced with losing his own company, Meyou Limited, right now after failing to keep his accounts up to date, it is time for Scobie to also realise that the Duchess of Sussex – who also retains the titles of Her Royal Highness (not used in practice, but kept in style), Countess of Dumbarton and Baroness Kilkeel – is simply NOT and never will be called “Duchess Meghan.” Lexical semantics do matter and it is time that this tedious twerp was taught just such.

     

    Duke and Duchess of Sussex
    The overtly ambitious and clearly arrogant Duchess of Sussex has unsurprisingly been called out over her supposedly rude behaviour and alleged bullying of staff in many quarters. Unsurprisingly, her chief cheerleader Omid Scobie has little to no interest in highlighting that and only spreads the poison his favourite American wishes to put out there.
    Dan Wootton shared his mirth about Scobie’s use of “Duchess Meghan” on Friday and remarked: “Give it up, mate.”
    Perez Hilton
    Perez Hilton added: “Why refer to her as Duchess Meghan? Meghan Markle and Harry walked away from that life.”
    Twitter users got in on the use of correct titles on Friday. One going by the name of Mrs Frensham rightly responded: “Get with the programme please.”
    Line of Succession
    Another account, Line of Succession, rightly concluded: “Do you mean the Duke and Duchess of Sussex? Why can’t journalists ever get royal titles right?”
    Scarf
    Returning to criticism of Scobie, a “Cambridge fan” going by the name of Scarfie, observed: “Cracks me up when you read “positive vibes only!” In his bio… then read his comment section. Not to mention his snarky tweets.”
    Responding to a discussion about the best and worst things about Twitter orchestrated by Michael Sayman, a “product lead” at Twitter, a user named Amanda observed that she enjoys “talking to people from all over the world” but viewed the presence of the Bot Sentinel bore Christopher Bouzy and his cohort Omid Scobie to be her “least favourite” things on the medium.
    Twitter abuse
    The ‘Finding Freedom’ co-author often bangs on about “hate speech” and “abuse” online and constantly carps about those that have the audacity to have a differing opinion to his own. This pathetic specimen likes to give it out, but he simply cannot cope with a little bit of stick himself.
    Yankee Wally radio
    Twitter user Gill B. twisted the conversation back to logic and reminded the PR peddler: “You will be pleased to learn that Yankee Wally is now a Royal Reporter, having been signed by Sobel Promotions, and will be broadcasting to millions worldwide on Rainbow Radio FM. You and Bouzy have given her a louder voice! Well done!”
  • Abused To Abuser – No Excuses Ghislaine

    Abused To Abuser – No Excuses Ghislaine

    As the ‘Daily Mail’ claims to share new ‘bombshell’ revelations suggesting Ghislaine Maxwell herself a victim of abuse, we remind them that this story is nothing new and abused to abuser should not be allowed as her excuse

    In 2019, Eleanor Berry – daughter of the one-time chairman and editor-in-chief of the Daily Telegraph and Sunday Telegraph Baron Hartwell of Peterborough Court in the City of London (1911 – 2001) and a woman who crazily considered Robert Maxwell a “surrogate father” – wrote a book in which she alleged the pension pot plunderer used to allow his favoured real daughter, Ghislaine, to choose how she got beaten.

     

    Self-declared “black humour” specialist Berry’s suggestion that the daughter ‘The Bouncing Czech’  named his yacht after was whipped also has long done the rounds and featured also in the crusading author Kirby Sommers’ Ghislaine Maxwell: An Unauthorized Biography and on our pages also, but now the former Vanity Fair editor Tina Brown (AKA Lady Evans) has got in on the game and written of these allegations also.

     

    Featured three years after they first surfaced, the story of how the now convicted criminal mucky madam Maxwell was effectively herself a victim of parental abuse was yesterday ludicrously described as a “new bombshell” by the Daily Mail’s chief reporter Martin Robinson. A simple Google search might have prevented Lord Rothermere’s operation making this error, but clearly nobody at Northcliffe House bothered to even think of that.

     

    Clearly, Mr Robinson was fed the uber connected Lady Evans’ publisher’s press release about her no doubt very heavily promoted tome. If he’d actually done some checks, he would have realised that Berry’s revelations to this particular author – which originally but unmentioned by the Mail included that Ghislaine Maxwell had been seeing a psychiatrist over “daddy’s canings” in New York in the 1990s – are nothing new and remain unsubstantiated.

     

    Whilst it is well-known that the most definite bully, thief and supposed war criminal Robert Maxwell had a temper that made the Emperor Nero look mild, the excuse that his now incarcerated daughter simply went  from abuse victim to abuser is somewhat pathetic and insulting to her multiple victims.

     

    After ‘dodgy daddy’ died by means foul or fouler depending on who you’d believe on his yacht in 1991, this wicked wastrel had a choice. Ghislaine Maxwell’s siblings accepted that their papa had died of natural causes; she did not and then she headed to New York and took up with Jeffrey Epstein – an equally perverted sexually perverted monster and Ponzi schemer whom her father had most definitely met prior to his deserved demise.

     

    At that time, Ghislaine Maxwell could have decided to make up for what had gone wrong in her world. Betty, her Roman Catholic mother, after all, devoted her subsequent life to researching the Holocaust, yet her French born 60-year-old daughter decided to take up sex trafficking minors. The choice is telling of a woman whose own father once said: “I have a beautiful daughter and she’s just like me.”

     

    Of Ghislaine Maxwell, the wonderfully witty wonder that is Anne Robinson – who worked for Robert Maxwell on the Mirror in the 1980s – is the one who actually sums up the deviant daughter best. In school mistress like fashion, the current host of Countdown remarked in June 2021: “She had a horrendous childhood, she lacked goals.”

     

    Pictured top – A glum looking Ghislaine Maxwell with her now late mother and a photograph of her late father. Though some have lauded the now convicted sex offender’s mother as a “good woman,” others have argued that she had an equally wicked and warped sense of morals to her clearly completely lacking in a moral compass husband.

     

    Ghislaine Maxwell Robert Maxwell Betty Maxwell
    In 2019, Eleanor Berry recounted of the familial abuse she claims to have been told of by Ghislaine Maxwell (pictured left with her father and right with her mother): “I know I shouldn’t have asked a nine-year-old child the question, but I was absolutely riveted. I tried to hide the tone in my voice. ‘When you said your father is going you a ‘hiding’ what sort of a hiding will it be?’ I asked as casually as I could. Ghislaine looked nonplussed… I was fascinated by the sight of the punitive instruments which had been arranged in a row on the table. Among things I notice, were a riding crop, a ruler, a stick, a cane, which made a swishing noise, on being brought down through the air, and a shoe horn which couldn’t inflict any pain at all. I regret that I was behaving very irresponsibly by toying with the psyche of a child… I completely lost my head. ‘I would ask your father if I could lower my trousers and whip me with the cane,’ I said. ‘What? On your bare bottom?’ ‘Yes,’ I said without thinking. I had caught a bit of sunstroke that morning and my wits were not about me. ‘Why would you ask my father to beat you on your bare bottom with the cane, particularly when the cane is the most painful of the lot? You’re not making any sense.’ It was at this point I got scared, as I feared Ghislaine would repeat my words to her father. ‘Well Ghislaine,’ I replied, ‘pain affects different people in different ways. If I were a man whipping me, I would only want him to be your father.’ … Ghislaine persisted like a dog knowing at its favourite bone. ‘I really didn’t understand you, when you said you’d actually like to take down your trousers and be whipped by my father.’” In a subsequent passage Berry describes Betty Maxwell as “[reminding] her a bit of Fagin, when he was counting tiaras” in the context of a conversation she had overheard about this abuse.
    Anne Robinson Tina Brown Lady Evans
    Anne Robinson (left) was amongst those not afraid of ‘Cap’n Bob’ when she worked for him; fellow journalist Tina Brown (right) is now, however, being incorrectly made out to be sharing “bombshell” news that is anything but news about how the mucky madam daughter of the pension pot plunderer was abused by her very own father.
    Jeffrey Epstein
    In February 2022, Kirby Sommers shared of a woman who replaced her monstrous father with the equally monstrous Jeffrey Epstein after the former’s death: “So, she knows she’s going to get a beating and Robert Maxwell storms into his office and Eleanor Berry goes on to chat with 9-year-old Ghislaine and Ghislaine is just ‘ho, hum, ho, hum, he’s going to hit me and Eleanor Berry says: ‘That’s really interesting and what tends to happen?’ Ghislaine gets up off the ground and she leads Eleanor into the house and into this room and she shows her a table and on the table are all kinds of things. There’s like a brush and a paddle and a whip. It goes on and on, there are all sorts of things that she can later choose. He allows her to choose, obviously, what he is going to beat her with. Eleanor is asking her: ‘What are you going to select?’ and Ghislaine tells her that she’s going to select the paddle because it doesn’t really hurt that much, but her friend, who is a lot older than her and in fact has a crush on Robert Maxwell says: ‘Well, I would select this.’ The whole thing is just a very bizarre episode, not only because here is an older woman talking to this 9-year-old child about her own sexual fantasies that she has about her father, but by this point it didn’t matter to Ghislaine that she was going to have a beating by her father. Later on, as she grows up, we now know it now through the victims allegedly… That Ghislaine was into say that world, that sadomasochistic world. She would treat her ‘sex slaves’ and I have to call them that because that’s how they refer to themselves with cruelty. This is something else she got from her father: She got the ability to turn on the charm, but to be cruel when needed. In her case, because she was a female, she learnt early on to turn on the charm for men and she was always very cruel to women – which she still is, she still is.”
  • Batshit Bonkers Bouzy Beaten By Yankee Wally

    Batshit Bonkers Bouzy Beaten By Yankee Wally

    As it is revealed that the nemesis of the Duchess of Sussex that is Sadie Quinlan (AKA ‘Yankee Wally’) has been given a radio show, the Bot Sentinel bore that is Christopher Bouzy has a moronic meltdown

    Following her ‘cancelation’ by YouTube, the wonderful Welsh warbler that is Sadie Quinlan (AKA ‘Yankee Wally’) has been reincarnated on Rainbow Radio FM.

     

    No longer shutdown courtesy of the antics of the bombastic birdbrained berk behind Bot Sentinel, Christopher Bouzy, Global News Ink reported that Quinlan had “signed a multi-year deal” and that “her videos [will] be seen on the station” and she has been “offered a weekly talk radio show slot to discuss all the latest news about the royal family.”

     

    Going further, Barbara Sobel of Sobel Promotions – the firm which has taken on Quinlan – remarked:

     

    “People have tried to silence Yankee in the past like many truth seekers and reporters.”

     

    “One can be banned from Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube, but there are always other outlets.”

     

    “Yankee Wally is a welcome addition to the station and its millions of listeners from around the world.”

     

    “One can dox on social media; that is for amateurs.  Yankee Wally is no amateur. This is why she was quickly grabbed and put under contract for her videos and upcoming radio show.”

     

    Elsewhere yesterday, Quinlan was featured in an article titled “Royal rumblers: Inside the world of anti-Meghan Markle YouTube” by Chris Stokel-Walker for Input. In it, another former YouTuber, Sue Smith, suggested of who got her and Quinlan banned: “I think it has something to do with Christopher Bouzy… I’m sure you must know who that is.”

     

    Now, though the PR peddling pillock Omid Scobie – author of Finding Freedom, the ragbag of rabid rubbish that the Duchess of Sussex rather conveniently forgot about contributing to – will definitely be next to have another hissy fit about this news, today we join those celebrating the return of ‘Yankee Wally.’ We look forward to much more from her and to yet more royal roastings.

     

    Pictured top – The murky, mucky minx formerly known as Meghan Markle may have tried to use her connections to silence ‘Yankee Wally,’ but she has unsurprisingly failed and simply caused her supporters to help her find new channels to share her thoughts.

     

    Tweet 2
    Naturally, the brazen bully boy Christopher Bouzy took to Twitter to share his clear fury that ‘Yankee Wally’ has been signed up by Sobel Promotions and promoted to a role of ‘royal reporter.’
    Tweet 1
    In another tweet, the cowardy custard bizarrely banged on about “criminals” and NASCAR and showed himself to be nothing but a woke wazzock.
    Modern Day Mrs Simpson
    In other news, it has been revealed that Prince Harry’s wicked wastrel wife and ‘Modern Day Mrs Simpson’ now has her sights set on the United Nations. Last week, the ‘Evening Standard’ reported that “the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are said to have been looking at an apartment near the United Nations headquarters in Manhattan,” whilst the website ‘Meaww’ asked: “Is Meghan Markle eyeing UN role like Amal Clooney?”
    Invictus Games angry Meghan Harry
    The self-serving pair of twerps that are the Duke and Duchess of Sussex did not bother to turn up for the memorial service for Prince Philip on the grounds of their fallacious claims that they are in danger, yet they are both quite capable of turning up to the Invictus Games in The Hague – where they’ll no doubt be personally profiteering with footage for Netflix and content for Spotify. Shame on this audacious and avaricious duo.
    Meghan Markle drunk
    As can only be expected of someone beyond divisive in both the family she was born to and the one she has most recently married into, the Duchess of Sussex remains drunk on her own self. Nobody or anything is more important to this wicked wench than her very own person.

  • Feckless Farting Fergie’s Flatulent Failings

    Feckless Farting Fergie’s Flatulent Failings

    That taker of loans from paedophiles and reader of books about farting Sarah, Duchess of York thinks she can get away with keeping £225,000 in tainted cash shows her yet again as nothing but a total berk

    It cannot be described as anything but “predictable” that Sarah, Duchess of York yet again finds herself in hot water given how childlike and naïve she genuinely is, but what she doesn’t yet realise is that like Aesop’s boy who cried wolf, her future antics will not be accepted.

     

    With news that the woman once nicknamed ‘The Duchess of Pork’ and ‘The Duchess of Dork’ is refusing to repay £225,000 she took from Alphabet Capital – a firm connected to an alleged fraudster named Selman Turk and described in the High Court as nothing but a “front for apparent money laundering” – the Queen’s favourite son’s live-in ex-wife yet again brings shame on the House of York and the wider royal family.

     

    Paid “apparently” if you’d believe the claptrap peddled out by her representatives to be a “brand ambassador for a US green energy firm” in spite of her having utterly no qualification or relation to anything to do with the energy sector, the toe sucking lover formerly known as Sarah Ferguson is said to “have considered Mr Turk, a banker, ‘perfectly bona fida.’”

     

    Considering the wider implications at this juncture it must also be once again considered that Prince Andrew’s soppy sidekick also has yet to repay sums provided to her by Chinese investors and worse still has never confirmed if she repaid sums she took from the since croaked paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.

     

    Sarah, Duchess of York – a woman who likes to take to YouTube to read books about farting – has yet again truly shown herself to be a reprehensible specimen and a stagnating stain on the royal family. It is time for her to shut up and shut down and it is time for her to speed off to Siberia. Whilst she’s at it, please, ‘Fergie,’ take that rotter who paid £12 million to a woman he’d supposedly never met with you.

     

    Pictured top – It must be asked: “Who in their right mind would trust this man?” of Selman Turk (left) and a clearly smashed-off-her-skull Sarah, Duchess of York (right).

     

    Drunk 2
    In May 2012, the drunken duchess was “forced to apologise to diners” at Osterio Dell’Arcanio restaurant in Chelsea after having “had an argument with someone who tried to take a photograph” of her in an episode of “drunken antics” whilst she was with a “rowdy group of people.” The restaurant’s sommelier, Maurizio Titone, remarked at the time: “They were a bit loud, but she went to another table to apologise for the noise.”
    In another episode in 2010, the redheaded rotter tried to sell access to to the royal family for £500,000. At the time an undercover reporter filmed her stating: “Five hundred thousand pounds, when you can, to me… open doors.”
    In 2018, the mother of Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie had a temper tantrum on ’60 Minutes Australia’ when questioned about seeking out cash from what she clearly must have known to be illegitimate sources.
    YouTube
    If she had an ounce of dignity, Sarah, Duchess of York would realise that reading allowed books about farting is anything but dignified.
    Drunk
    The Queen’s second son’s live-in ex-wife has clearly lately rather let the hooch go to her head. In excusing the ‘bestie’ of paedophiles like Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, all she does is to bring total and utter shame on her relatives. Meanwhile, taking loans from crooks simply shows her to be a greedy grubber.

    The Weird Words of “Greedy” and “Needy” Sarah, Duchess of York

    Of sex, her and goats: “One of the worst headlines said 82% [of the population] would rather sleep with a goat than Fergie. It’s never left me.”

     

    Of the royal family: “They tried to put the little redhead in a cage.”

     

    Of her life: “I have been in the gutter.”

     

    Of food, family and dining: “As long as it is hot, wet and goes down the right way, it’s fine with me.”

     

    “With every smell, I smell food. With every sight, I see food. I can almost hear food. I want to spade the whole lot through my mouth at Mach 2. Basta!”

     

    “We all sit round the table and eat together. Andrew and I believe in total parent unity. We’re best friends.”

     

    Of wanting to be a television star: “I would quite like to go on Dancing With The Stars. I would like somebody to teach me to tango. I do know the show and my children would be so proud of me.”

     

    Of when she decided she wanted to bag a royal: “I met [Prince Andrew] when I was 12, and I said: ‘I’m going to marry him.’”

     

    Of marriage, divorce and work: “I left my marriage knowing I’d have to work. I have.”

     

    “I didn’t want a divorce, but had to because of circumstance.”

     

    “I wish we’d never got divorced. He and I both wish we’d never divorced, but we did. I wish I could go back and be the bride again, but I can’t.”

     

    Of her many, many mistakes: “I felt that I ostracised myself by my behaviour, by the past, by living with all the regrets of my mistakes, that I sort of wore a hair shirt and beat myself up most of the day thinking and regretting why did I make such a mistake. Why have I made so many mistakes?”

     

    “You look at the devil in the face, which you do. Then you forgive, and you say: ‘OK, I’ve made almost a mistake that will never be forgotten,’ and forgive.”

     

    “I was so out of control with desperation… I was looking for quick fixes in the places I wouldn’t normally look… I’ve been a huge, over-trusting, idiotic, stupid woman that went to look for the perfect situation, and that’s all I can say really.”