Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

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

I may be alone in this but I'm kinda hoping it doesn't actually go to court and he settles, that is unless she wants her day in court or all his offers to settle are unacceptable to her.

His reputation is already in tatters, he's not coming back from this. Settling out of court will just further shred what reputation has left. If it does go to court I fear it could be really unpleasant for Virginia Giuffre and expensive legal types viciously going after a victim / survivor will be a nasty spectacle.
 
Teaboy said:
I may be alone in this but I'm kinda hoping it doesn't actually go to court and he settles, that is unless she wants her day in court or all his offers to settle are unacceptable to her.

His reputation is already in tatters, he's not coming back from this. Settling out of court will just further shred what reputation has left. If it does go to court I fear it could be really unpleasant for Virginia Giuffre and expensive legal types viciously going after a victim / survivor will be a nasty spectacle.
Click to expand...
I'd rather not see his victim have to go through it. If he settles he won't have a reputation left, even if he wins people will still believe he did it.
 
Worth noting that the judgement on the 2009 agreement was simply that the court couldn't kick the case out at this stage; he'll be able to argue that he's protected by its terms at any full trial, if it goes that far (which I doubt).
 
I lose track of his delaying tactics. He was trying to argue that Giuffre no longer domiciled in US therefore not entitled to sue in NY. Is the question of jurisdiction settled now?
 
bluescreen said:
I lose track of his delaying tactics. He was trying to argue that Giuffre no longer domiciled in US therefore not entitled to sue in NY. Is the question of jurisdiction settled now?
Click to expand...
I think that line of defence was kicked out a little while before they moved onto the other issue that was dealt with today.
 
Just heard on the radio the ruling described as a multi-faceted defeat for Windsor! :D

Especially liked the judge's dismissal of his claim that he could not construct a defence against the claims without knowing what they were...said that if his position was one of denial, there was nothing he needed to know.
 
elbows said:
I think that line of defence was kicked out a little while before they moved onto the other issue that was dealt with today.
Click to expand...
Lawyers will generally exhaust legal defences before moving onto the facts. It's probably Andrew himself is just following advice here. There may be further technicalities come up..

I'm not quite sure what the accusation is here...it's not criminal statutory rape case (and I'm guessing the state of Florida are not sure they would get a conviction, and it would be for them to prosecute this).

They went after Maxwell on criminal charges for trafficking minors across state lines (a federal crime).

She is seeking financial damages in a civil case for him having sex with her when she was below the age of consent. I wonder if in a civil case, if he says the genuinely believed she was 18 at the time, that is any sort of mitigation. One sort of assumes he is not an introspective type that wondered why girls were being "introduced" to him, or thinking to ask how old they were.

It would be very interesting to see if he sweats under deposition. He won't be able to not answer questions, or plead the 4th...and depositions can be very aggressive (I've been through it a few times as an expert in the federal courts). There is no judge there to ensure fair play...and it all gets transcribed. Bits that are objected to will be redacted and not used in the trial.
 
Magnus McGinty said:
A tricky strategy given he has ‘no recollection’ of having met her and has suggested the photo is a forgery.
Click to expand...
indeed...but it's what he says in under oath in deposition and at trial that matters. I suspect he'll end up settling, maybe "on the court house steps" to avoid a trial. The depositions will give everyone a good sense of how strong the case is.
 
pseudonarcissus said:
She is seeking financial damages in a civil case for him having sex with her when she was below the age of consent. I wonder if in a civil case, if he says the genuinely believed she was 18 at the time, that is any sort of mitigation. One sort of assumes he is not an introspective type that wondered why girls were being "introduced" to him, or thinking to ask how old they were.

.
Click to expand...

He's blown this chance when he did the Panorama interview. He didn't say he didn't remember he explicitly stated there is no way it could have happened and listed several reasons as proof. He basically called her a liar on TV over and over again. I'm not sure coming out and saying oh that girl, I thought we were talking about someone else. Was she really under 18? will work at any level as mitigation.
 
Out of interest, assuming he attends court and is questioned, does anyone think he will tell the truth? I suspect he'll be so arrogant as to assume everyone is beneath him and he can do, and say, as he chooses.
 
Teaboy said:
He's blown this chance when he did the Panorama interview. He didn't say he didn't remember he explicitly stated there is no way it could have happened and listed several reasons as proof. He basically called her a liar on TV over and over again. I'm not sure coming out and saying oh that girl, I thought we were talking about someone else. Was she really under 18? will work at any level as mitigation.
Click to expand...
Especially as it's a near certainty that the interview will be admitted in evidence.
 
This news must have spoiled their well-earned winter break in the Swiss ski chalet. :(

Let us hope that Princess Beatrice's husband has agreed to buy the place, so they will all be able to carry on as usual.
 
Teaboy said:
He's blown this chance when he did the Panorama interview. He didn't say he didn't remember he explicitly stated there is no way it could have happened and listed several reasons as proof. He basically called her a liar on TV over and over again. I'm not sure coming out and saying oh that girl, I thought we were talking about someone else. Was she really under 18? will work at any level as mitigation.
Click to expand...
they won't be playing the interview at the trial, and I'm sure the defence will be objecting to seating any juror who admits to having seen it.

I really don't see this going to trial unless it transpires she had fake ID or something (which is plausible).
 
UrbaneFox said:
This news must have spoiled their well-earned winter break in the Swiss ski chalet. :(

Let us hope that Princess Beatrice's husband has agreed to buy the place, so they will all be able to carry on as usual.
Click to expand...

From his Wikipedia entry :-

At the age of 23, with the support of his family,[16] he started Banda, a property development and interior design company, which claims to develop homes in "undervalued" parts of London.[16] This has been challenged by property experts on Twitter and Forbes, who argue that "there is nothing undervalued in Notting Hill", where Mapelli Mozzi's latest project is located, and describe the district as "a super prime residential destination".[17]

Am I the only one or does this sound 'iffy' to to anyone else? I suspect he might be up for buying the chalet.
 
He could have admitted to having sex with her but only in Britain, no, then denied any knowledge or even suspicion of the trafficking?

Are they going after him for having sex with someone under 18 where that is illegal?
 
pseudonarcissus said:
Lawyers will generally exhaust legal defences before moving onto the facts. It's probably Andrew himself is just following advice here. There may be further technicalities come up..

I'm not quite sure what the accusation is here...it's not criminal statutory rape case (and I'm guessing the state of Florida are not sure they would get a conviction, and it would be for them to prosecute this).

They went after Maxwell on criminal charges for trafficking minors across state lines (a federal crime).

She is seeking financial damages in a civil case for him having sex with her when she was below the age of consent. I wonder if in a civil case, if he says the genuinely believed she was 18 at the time, that is any sort of mitigation. One sort of assumes he is not an introspective type that wondered why girls were being "introduced" to him, or thinking to ask how old they were.

It would be very interesting to see if he sweats under deposition. He won't be able to not answer questions, or plead the 4th...and depositions can be very aggressive (I've been through it a few times as an expert in the federal courts). There is no judge there to ensure fair play...and it all gets transcribed. Bits that are objected to will be redacted and not used in the trial.
Click to expand...
Her civil claim against him is in respect of sexual assault and battery, and emotional distress. Essentially, she's saying that she was compelled to have sex with him against her will, by him, Epstein, and/or Maxwell, on a number of occasions, and, separately, that Andrew knew she was trafficked.

If there were to be criminal proceedings, they wouldn't be in Florida; she doesn't allege that he committed any crime there.

I don't think age of consent is the focus. She says the sex began place when she was 17, which is the age of consent in NY. She alleges also it took place in London, where it's 16, and the US Virgin Islands, where I think it might have been 18 (it is currently). The things she's alleging - essentialy rape - would amount to crimes regardless of the victim's age; the legal significance of her age is that the claim would've been time barred had she not been under 18 at the time of the alleged crimes.

I think you the 5th, rather than the 4th. And I think he might be able to rely on it to refuse to answer questions in a civil deposition, albeit that the court could draw an inference from that refusal (in the civil proceedings only).
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Humberto
British Empire and Slave Trade Reparations
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
155
Views
6K
shambler
shambler
tony.c
Major suspect named in Stephen Lawrence murder by BBC
Replies
23
Views
2K
Saul Goodman
Saul Goodman
Elpenor
Prince William’s many good deeds
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
176
Views
10K
Petcha
P
BristolEcho
Modern Slavery at TN Trawlers
Replies
5
Views
589
CNT36
C
friedaweed
Gwynedd council calls for abolition of title Prince of Wales
Replies
2
Views
412
Serene
Serene
Back
Top Bottom