Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Prince Andrew, Duke of York, named in underage 'sex slave' lawsuit

There's an interesting question for the royal protection officers, or whatever group of plod defend the beast in his lair: if the papers weren't served, where are they now? Did they bin them?

Well if you will give written documents to people who can't read.
 
Hague convention and shit - I’m pretty sure there was this mechanism for dumping papers to a random in his own country . I cannot recall anything else if this - do the papers actually have to received in hand to formalise the action ?
 
Hague convention and shit - I’m pretty sure there was this mechanism for dumping papers to a random in his own country . I cannot recall anything else if this - do the papers actually have to received in hand to formalise the action ?
I remember when Berezovsky was attempting to serve papers to Abromovich there was a cat and mouse game around Sloane Square or some such.
 
I would imagine Guffrie's lawyers would have to demonstrate to the judge they have made every reasonable effort to serve the papers, othewise it would be like the old Milk Tray adverts with somebody swinging through the window to leave it on his bedside.
Giving it to a Plod strikes me as about as reasonable as it can get, Any reasonable person would expect a Plod to pass it up the chain of command and at some point it would end up in the grubbies of one of He Who Cannot Sweat's flunkies.
Any reasonable person would assume a flunky would draw legal papers to the attention of the person he flunks for. It's up to the judge to decide but I don't think the "It wasn't served" argument is going to impress him.
 
Hague convention and shit - I’m pretty sure there was this mechanism for dumping papers to a random in his own country . I cannot recall anything else if this - do the papers actually have to received in hand to formalise the action ?


It's fucking bobbins, some bloke with big hair has popped up and said he's representing the slimy nonce, hand the shit to him and it's should be done.
 
I don't think he entered into any agreement (prior or otherwise). Rather, he trying to claim the settlement his alleged victim reached with Epstein prevents her from pursuing him. Though he seems to concede that he's not seen the terms of it!
Classy that.

If they fail on this and it does end up in court, you wonder how sweaty's lawyers will play it? He's already gone with 'I don't remember meeting her' and strongly implied the picture is pixels. They'll no doubt have a go at saying he wasn't in location x on day y, though I think they've already fucked up on that (one of epstein's servants said they'd seen him?). They'll also have a go at suggesting her story hasn't been consistent or similar. Ultimately though, they can't fall back on 'it was consensual', having previously said it didn't happen.

I doubt he'll get a judgement against him, but who knows. Ultimately though, he's hedged himself in a bit (well, mainly by being guilty).
 
I would imagine Guffrie's lawyers would have to demonstrate to the judge they have made every reasonable effort to serve the papers, othewise it would be like the old Milk Tray adverts with somebody swinging through the window to leave it on his bedside.
Giving it to a Plod strikes me as about as reasonable as it can get, Any reasonable person would expect a Plod to pass it up the chain of command and at some point it would end up in the grubbies of one of He Who Cannot Sweat's flunkies.
Any reasonable person would assume a flunky would draw legal papers to the attention of the person he flunks for. It's up to the judge to decide but I don't think the "It wasn't served" argument is going to impress him.
071F69FB-5F69-453F-9E71-8E79B30B6205.jpeg

“Don’t answer it, son!”
 
Classy that.

If they fail on this and it does end up in court, you wonder how sweaty's lawyers will play it? He's already gone with 'I don't remember meeting her' and strongly implied the picture is pixels. They'll no doubt have a go at saying he wasn't in location x on day y, though I think they've already fucked up on that (one of epstein's servants said they'd seen him?). They'll also have a go at suggesting her story hasn't been consistent or similar. Ultimately though, they can't fall back on 'it was consensual', having previously said it didn't happen.

I doubt he'll get a judgement against him, but who knows. Ultimately though, he's hedged himself in a bit (well, mainly by being guilty).
I think his US lawyers will argue three technical preliminary issues: jurisdiction, service, and that the claim has been settled. If he doesn't succeed on them, then I suspect he won't engage further, for risk of making any judgement against him enforceable in the English courts. Unless he's so confident that he'll succeed (which, for a normal person, would suggest you've got some killer evidence, but for an entitled prick might just be arrogance).
 
One thing I don't understand about Windsor's lawyer trying to rely on the Giuffre/Epstein deal is how Windsor could enforce it if he's not a party to the contract. Surely it's only Epstein and his heirs and assigns? Or did Epstein assign a right to Windsor? Or what? Is it not a contract but some other beast?
It's a long time since I studied contract law, which is roughly the same in principle in the US as here. :confused:
Well there's a piece of English law called the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 (as Athos has mentioned) which in some cases allows a party who isn't a party to a contract to enforce rights under said contract, but I doubt the advisers are relying on that simply because the prior agreement is unlikely to be under English law, having been (as far as I can tell) concluded in the US.

You can't pick an choose which laws apply just because it's convenient for you.
 
It's fucking bobbins, some bloke with big hair has popped up and said he's representing the slimy nonce, hand the shit to him and it's should be done.
Wasn't there something about the law firm representing him refusing to accept any papers being served on him?
 
AFAIK her lawyers sent copies to various firms of lawyers who had connections to him. But surely if he has engaged a firm to act on his behalf in this case they can be handed the papers and get we're off..?
I would have said say, being a sensible and logical person. The law firm in question may refuse to accept any papers attempted to be served on a client, for their own reasons. I can imagine the process server had a big list of potential places to serve the papers on his HRH and not been successful, hence giving up and leaving them with the plod at Windsor.

But said list will be useful to the defence team, who will be able to show that they tried pretty damn hard to serve HRH.

I expect former lawyers would not accept the papers if he was no longer a client.
 
I would have said say, being a sensible and logical person. The law firm in question may refuse to accept any papers attempted to be served on a client, for their own reasons. I can imagine the process server had a big list of potential places to serve the papers on his HRH and not been successful, hence giving up and leaving them with the plod at Windsor.

But said list will be useful to the defence team, who will be able to show that they tried pretty damn hard to serve HRH.

I expect former lawyers would not accept the papers if he was no longer a client.


Yeah, outfits like Matrix Churchill could quite rightly say no, but he was represented in court yesterday (video conference) by some LA attorney, surely the judge could just dump the papers on him and move on?
 
For being so shit at not hiding it, I meant? No doubt she thinks her spawn are entitled to do exactly as they pleased, but surely she's pissed off abot the interview/pizza express/no sweat rubbish
I think she’s probably more annoyed at the media for not knowing their place. But, yeah, I’m sure even she thinks the no sweat stuff was fucking stupid.
 
Do we think in private, Lizzy is ripping him a new one?
Seriously doubt it even setting aside the fact that she is the Queen, she's still his mother and mothers are often blind to the failings of their offspring, the not my baby he's a good boy and it must be a mistake jag.
One gets the impression that Chucky is less than happy with him though.
 
Do we think in private, Lizzy is ripping him a new one?
By all accounts one thing Liz has been acutely aware of throughout her reign is the importance of PR and the public face of the royals. The whole “one has to be seen” thing. I’d imagine she’s furious, albeit with the damage to their image rather than at anything he’s actually done.
 
Back
Top Bottom