[Andy McDandy]

Will he face a further name strip to single barrel? And then Andy Batt if convicted.

Well, he might take "Andy Mount" as an instruction.

[Abernathy]

I looked it up. Apparently, he is called “Mountbatten-Windsor” because Brenda decreed that all of her offspring with Phil the Greek should have that hyphenated surname, to reflect their father’s lineage as well as her own - otherwise, they’d apparently just be “Windsor”, which Brenda thought was a bit of a raw deal for poor old Phil.

The name “Mountbatten” is apparently an anglicisation of the German “Battenberg”. The family’s original name is of course “Saxe-Coburg Gotha”, a German dynastic name which it was thought expedient to change to “Windsor” when the UK was at war with Germany in 1917.

[AOB]

I've associated the name Mountbatten with noncery for a few years now, following the allegations against Lord Mountbatten many years ago. Supposedly the offences took place at a children's home in Northern Ireland. I did wonder that if it wasn't true then why on earth would the victim would pick his name, it seems incredibly random. Not much is mentioned about it, but it is on a smattering of news websites if you search, I suspect the Royals have made sure the press don't go on about it.

[Abernathy]

The BBC news coverage is beginning to get right on my tits, though. The lead presenter on the lunchtime bulletin had no sooner intoned that “Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor continues to deny any wrong-doing”, than he handed over to a reporter stationed at Sandringham, who within about 90 seconds had also said that “Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor continues to deny any wrong-doing”. Cut to another reporter, stationed at Windsor, who didn’t say it, but there was an on-screen banner proclaiming yet again that “Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor continues to deny all wrong-doing”.

They must have repeated it about 25 times in a 20 minute bulletin. I think we all understand that he denies all wrong-doing.

[Malcolm Armsteen]

Mandy Rice-Davies comes to mind.

[Andy McDandy]

I suspect he's very litigious, and the media are aware of it. Also, that clips can be spliced together or cut to give the impression of guilt - hence the repeated caveats.

I think that at least when this first became public, the RF could hold access to them and their considerable archives over the media - want any sort of exclusive (or indeed a reply from the press office)? Play nice.

[Oboogie]

The BBC news coverage is beginning to get right on my tits, though. The lead presenter on the lunchtime bulletin had no sooner intoned that “Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor continues to deny any wrong-doing”, than he handed over to a reporter stationed at Sandringham, who within about 90 seconds had also said that “Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor continues to deny any wrong-doing”. Cut to another reporter, stationed at Windsor, who didn’t say it, but there was an on-screen banner proclaiming yet again that “Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor continues to deny all wrong-doing”.

They must have repeated it about 25 times in a 20 minute bulletin. I think we all understand that he denies all wrong-doing.

It's not just the BBC, although they are held to a standard not applied to other media outlets. It's fear of prejudicing any forthcoming trail. James O'Brien did two hours of waffle this morning, terrified that any caller could drop LBC in the shit at any moment. I don't really understand how this works or indeed how a jury can be selected for such a public case. Where does one find people who've not already been influenced by media coverage who can come to the court with a truly open mind?

[Andy McDandy]

Something Johnnie Cochrane exploited when defending OJ Simpson.

[soulboy]

I suspect he's very litigious,

Or was when Mummy was willing to bail out her special little boy. Now the apron strings have been cut, and I'm not sure that there will be a queue of people looking to take on any libel case pro bono. Particularly when part of the criteria would be serious harm to this particular claimant's reputation.

[Oboogie]

I suspect he's very litigious,

Or was when Mummy was willing to bail out her special little boy. Now the apron strings have been cut, and I'm not sure that there will be a queue of people looking to take on any libel case pro bono. Particularly when part of the criteria would be serious harm to this particular claimant's reputation.

It's not Andrew suing for libel so much as his legal team claiming he can't receive a fair trail due to 'biased' reporting and getting the case dropped - hence the need to stress that he claims he is innocent.

[Samanfur]

Any case he mounts will have an interesting discovery phase.

BBC reporting that the king wasn't told about the raid in advance.

[Youngian]

A pundit claimed he's the first senior royal to be arrested since Charles I. If the Redcoats can make an elite arrest, the 'No Kings' American Republic should get its skates on.