English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

you couldnt have the queen versus the queen in court could you. I think she could literaly get away with murder.

2007-04-10 03:31:04 · 29 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture Royalty

29 answers

The Murder (Abolition of Death Penalty) Act of 1965 suspended the death penalty in England, Wales and Scotland for murder for a period of five years. In 1969 the act came up for renewal and the then Home Secretary, James Callaghan proposed a motion to remove the five year limit which was carried by both houses on December 18, 1969.
The UK later (October 10, 2003) acceded to the 13th Protocol, which prohibits the death penalty under all
circumstances.

Now, The Queen. If you take a look at the royal prerogative it says, 'The monarch is also immune from prosecution in the courts, though the scope of the immunity that once attached to the Crown has reduced. (The ostensible logic for this is that the Queen is present in all courts and acts as the prosecuting authority in most criminal cases, either directly or indirectly: she cannot therefore sue or prosecute herself or judge her own case. However this logic can be said to be flawed, because there appears no problem in judging her own cases as prosecutor, or as claimant in civil litigation. The explanation most commonly offered in texts on Crown immunity is that "the Queen can do no wrong", and therefore cannot be held liable for breaches of contract or in tort). In particular, several Acts of Parliament have allowed agents of the Crown (i.e. government employees) to be sued in the courts. The Queen's daughter, the Princess Royal, actually has a criminal record (for not keeping her dog under control).'

So the Queen is not subject to Trial...

2007-04-10 08:33:45 · answer #1 · answered by Lord Advisor 2 · 1 2

She cannot be legally tried. I doubt it would be easy to cover up something like that, either. She would probably abdicate the throne, leaving William as King, and quietly be pensioned off somewhere.

Parliament could not change the law to prosecute the Queen, that was a ridiculous answer. Parliament does not have that power. The Queen can dissolve Parliament any time she likes. And I doubt the British people would allow such a thing to happen anyway; we're a bit funny about traditions like that. That's why old big-eared Tony has had to fill the Lords with his mates instead of getting rid of it.

2007-04-11 02:13:56 · answer #2 · answered by Wild About Harry 4 · 1 0

The law says that The Queen can do no wrong. She CANNOT be tried in Her own court. END OF!
The only possibility is that She might be declared insane, in which case, the next in line to the Throne, in this hypothetical case Prince William of Wales would become PRINCE REGENT until and unless The Queen died. Until Her Majesty departs this life, She is The Queen.
Would She be declared insane for murdering Prince Charles?

2007-04-10 05:47:53 · answer #3 · answered by Raymo 6 · 4 0

I would wish no harm on Charles, but i would love to think the queen would be exiled to Sandringham and he beautiful daughter Princess Anne would take over as consort until William has matured enough. Anne would be a wonderful Queen.

2016-07-24 00:01:28 · answer #4 · answered by Robert 4 · 1 0

This basically happened in Nepal a few years ago. The crown prince killed the royal family there, turned the gun on himself but hung onto life long enough to have been declared king.

Even though, technically, he was named king before he died and his uncle was named regent, it's doubtful, had he lived, his reign would have been long.

2007-04-11 09:55:17 · answer #5 · answered by rann_georgia 7 · 0 0

That easy nothing there is no judge with the power to bring the queen to justice as she is the supreme judge of England. she could be tired under the European Union i think but am not sure if then would have that power. I real think that under the law the queen could kill the pince of wales and say she did it for the good of the kingdom

2007-04-10 14:48:34 · answer #6 · answered by The High King 2 · 0 2

Nothing. The worst that might happen is she would be forced to resign as queen, leaving it to WIlliam. He would have to leave the army and come back to the castle to take his place.

She might be driven from the country to France or Elba or Sicily. But no she would not be given a "fair trial"--it would be completely covered up. Perhaps ruled an "accident" and in her grief over his death, she would respectfully step down. You'd never hear about it in the press or anything.

2007-04-10 03:36:51 · answer #7 · answered by phantom_of_valkyrie 7 · 1 2

I guess she would have to go to jail liek anyone else who did the same thing.
Ther would be a public outcry if the Monarch was seen to be above the law.

2007-04-11 12:23:23 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

If she murdered Chuck and then old El Greco plus Randy Andy and horse-face Ann, she would get a medal (before we pushed her and the rest of the spongers out.) We could fill the 'Britannia' with fuel, load them all on board, and set it out to sea.

2007-04-10 03:44:05 · answer #9 · answered by The Shadow 3 · 1 5

She could - as the regent she has absolute immunity from criminal prosecution. It's like you say - the Crown can't prosecute the crown.

2007-04-10 03:47:54 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 5 1

fedest.com, questions and answers