Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

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

"Whether or not she was complicit in assisting Epstein with his child abuse is neither here nor there when you consider the allegations against Prince Andrew, which are that he raped and molested her. However he tarnishes her character, it makes absolutely no difference to that issue.”
 
"Whether or not she was complicit in assisting Epstein with his child abuse is neither here nor there when you consider the allegations against Prince Andrew, which are that he raped and molested her. However he tarnishes her character, it makes absolutely no difference to that issue.”
I think they are trying to say that she wasn't coerced into having sex as she was in effect a coconspirator with Epstein as she willingly recruited other girls to the cause, which seems a very strange thing to allege in this case, as if he never met her her part in the the whole thing is irrelevant! Its a very bizarre line of attack that they are pursuing, It s like a scatter gun approach and they hope one line of defence will stick, but the danger as i see it is by following certain lines of defence theres an almost implied admission that he did meet her and did have sex with her.
 
I’d like to think that the “oh but she’s just a slut” argument has long since died out. Clearly not for the wealthy. You’d think he’d have learnt from his terrible interview but I guess he expects it will go his way as he’s lived a life where it generally does. And it might.
I think his position will pretty much guarantee he gets away with it. There's a lot of royalists in both the UK and US who will turn a blind eye towards his noncery.
 
I’d like to think that the “oh but she’s just a slut” argument has long since died out. Clearly not for the wealthy. You’d think he’d have learnt from his terrible interview but I guess he expects it will go his way as he’s lived a life where it generally does. And it might.

I'm sure this 'argument' will have plenty of traction with the kind of horrid old arseholes who had been thinking exactly this about all women for decades.

And of course the more backwards you are in your attitudes, the more likely you are to be a royalist.
 
So a late 2022 date pencilled in for the trial. I guess to spare the surely-deceased-by-then Queen’s blushes.


btw boies is a heavy. she's got good representation there.

in the nyc press:

"Prince Andrew could be on the hot seat within two months, to answer questions in a lawsuit brought by a woman who says the British royal had sex with her three times starting when she was 16, the accuser’s lawyer said Wednesday.

Attorney David Boies, told a Manhattan Federal Court judge that he intends to swiftly depose at least eight to 12 people — including the Duke of York — in his client Virginia Giuffre’s sex abuse suit."


(sry about the link)
 
Boies has form for particularly intimidating litigious tactics, for example he was a lawyer to Theranos and Elizabeth Holmes and his firm would regularly try to intimidate ex-employees into silence over the company's practices, including reports of having them followed by private investigators.
 
Boies has form for particularly intimidating litigious tactics, for example he was a lawyer to Theranos and Elizabeth Holmes and his firm would regularly try to intimidate ex-employees into silence over the company's practices, including reports of having them followed by private investigators.

yes he does.

 
Back
Top Bottom