Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

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

Bahnhof Strasse said:
... if her lawyers are doing some kind of no-win no-fee thing cos they are arch republicans or (more likely) will take a slice of her book/etc revenue, then why not reject a settlement and make the cunt truly pay for his crimes?
Click to expand...
The risk that she'll lose and have to pay his costs.
 
bluescreen said:
Do you reckon that with top flight SF attack lawyers the best will in the world a NY jury will come to this unprejudiced, prepared to believe that Windsor is as innocent as the next innocent man? Or do you think there may be some residual animus against the entitled attitudes of British royalty?
Click to expand...
I suspect they'll have a mixture of prejudices, including those that typically prevent women who are victims of historic abuse getting justice.
 
Athos said:
I suspect they'll have a mixture of prejudices, including those that typically prevent women who are victims of historic abuse getting justice.
Click to expand...
Yeah, there is that. There's also the arguably stronger prejudice against entitled foreigners messing around with American girls.
 
belboid said:
It's not really true that VG will need to prove that the Paedo Prince fucked her knowing she had been trafficked. It's a civil case so 'all' she need show is that he is lying and that her version of events is highly plausible.
Click to expand...
She will need to prove her case (to the civil standard). It's possible she might show he lied whilst still failing to prove her case.
 
AnnO'Neemus said:
I'm fairly sure that having sex with a victim of trafficking is illegal irrespective of that age. If someone's been trafficked then there is no age of consent, so age of consent is a moot point.
Click to expand...

8ball said:
That seems kind of odd. So if someone is trafficked from A to B they lose their capacity to consent to sex with anyone? :confused:
Click to expand...

A trafficked person can consent to sex, but her case is that she was forced to have sex with him, and that he did the forcing and/or knew she had been forced.
 
Bahnhof Strasse said:
I reckon she’ll go with it, at least see how it pans out. Right now Douglas Bader has more legs to stand on than the paedo prince.
Click to expand...
I suspect it'll depend on what, if anything, is offered (monetary and non-monetary), and when. Sadly well not know anything about that - won't be public.
 
Athos said:
I suspect it'll depend on what, if anything, is offered (monetary and non-monetary), and when. Sadly well not know anything about that - won't be public.
Click to expand...


So long as the deal absolves me from any future parking tickets I’m good with that.
 
Maybe somebody has the answer to something that is confusing me at the moment.

We keep talking about the nonce giving evidence if it goes to trial and how disastrous he will be at it. But as I remember it, he can’t go to the States without risking being immediately taken in for questioning. So will they set up some kind of video link for evidence? Or will he actually be unable to give evidence at all?
 
kabbes said:
Maybe somebody has the answer to something that is confusing me at the moment.

We keep talking about the nonce giving evidence if it goes to trial and how disastrous he will be at it. But as I remember it, he can’t go to the States without risking being immediately taken in for questioning. So will they set up some kind of video link for evidence? Or will he actually be unable to give evidence at all?
Click to expand...


There is talk about video link.
 
kabbes said:
Maybe somebody has the answer to something that is confusing me at the moment.

We keep talking about the nonce giving evidence if it goes to trial and how disastrous he will be at it. But as I remember it, he can’t go to the States without risking being immediately taken in for questioning. So will they set up some kind of video link for evidence? Or will he actually be unable to give evidence at all?
Click to expand...
I think that'd be up to the judge.
 
kabbes said:
By itself, that wouldn’t be a great look. “The defendant can’t be in court himself today because if he sets foot in this country, the feds are going to arrest him for doing this thing he is claiming he didn’t do”
Click to expand...


Guess he can cite Covid and that, but as the news on all channels was keen reiterate, “there are no good options for Prince Andrew.” 😀
 
andysays said:
I don’t know about anyone else, but to me that reads like an explicit denial that any of it happened, not just the having sex bit at the end.
Click to expand...
I think, in the context of the whole interview, it's clear he accepts that he may have met her at some point (albeit he does seem to suggest that, if he did, it wasn't in the night she alleges).
 
kabbes said:
By itself, that wouldn’t be a great look. “The defendant can’t be in court himself today because if he sets foot in this country, the feds are going to arrest him for doing this thing he is claiming he didn’t do”
Click to expand...

I think because of this and his batshit TV interview I think should this go to court the chances of him giving evidence are slim. I suspect they would rather go for a 'test the evidence' approach which would mean ripping into her.

It might not work but given his own press officer couldn't stop him doing that interview he would likely be an absolute loose cannon giving evidence. His particular combination of extreme arrogance, total tone deafness and dim-wittedness would make it a very brave decision by any of his legal team to stick him on the stand.
 
Teaboy said:
I think because of this and his batshit TV interview I think should this go to court the chances of him giving evidence are slim. I suspect they would rather go for a 'test the evidence' approach which would mean ripping into her.

It might not work but given his own press officer couldn't stop him doing that interview he would likely be an absolute loose cannon giving evidence. His particular combination of extreme arrogance, total tone deafness and dim-wittedness would make it a very brave decision by any of his legal team to stick him on the stand.
Click to expand...
He won't have the option of not giving evidence, exception on a question-by-question basis insofar as he pleads the fifth (from which the court may draw an inference in civil proceedings).
 
The pic of him running from paparazzi outside Tramp, wearing the same outfit as pictured with his accuser, lashing sweat. Can anyone use skills to date it?
 
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