Prince Andrew tries to dismiss Virginia Giuffre’s lawsuit

Prince Andrew and Virginia Giuffre

A federal judge cast doubt on Tuesday’s arguments from Prince Andrew’s The legal team dismissed a lawsuit alleging the royal sexually assaulted a 17-year-old girl, sharply questioning whether a 2009 settlement with Jeffrey Epstein could protect him from serious charges.

Prince accuser Virginia Giuffre (née Roberts) claims that the Duke of York sexually assaulted her in three locations: Epstein’s New York mansion and private island in the US Virgin Islands and London home The sex trafficker has now been convicted Ghislaine Maxwell. Giuffre’s pre-settled lawsuit against Maxwell helped spur that prosecution. Before going public, Giuffre sued Epstein as “Jane Doe 102”.

It was under that pseudonym that Giuffre entered into a $500,000 deal with Epstein in 2009, which included a shielding extended release clause.other potential defendants“Avoid civil liability.

Senior Judge of the United States Lewis Kaplan Brettler baked on language.

“How is ‘potential defendant’ distinguished from ‘defendant’?” Judge Kaplan asked.

Brettler defines this phrase as “a person who may be called an accused but is not an accused”.

Looking skeptical about that interpretation, Judge Kaplan said: “It’s a word neither you nor I can find any meaning.”

After the judge asked if the language shielded the Sultan of Brunei, Brettler replied that it would if there were such charges against him.

The prince’s legal team pointed to Giuffre’s lawsuit against Professor Emeritus at Harvard Law School Alan Dershowitzwho they claim cited the release in their defense. Judge Kaplan noted that Dershowitz had another reason to invoke the agreement. The settlement gave special immunity to Epstein’s lawyers, and Dershowitz was one of them.

As for the expanded language of the 2009 agreement, judge Kaplan noted: “It is possible that Epstein would disagree with half a million dollars for clearer language, language that is more protective of her.”

The prince’s legal team also argued that Giuffre’s case was too vague to pass the set, a lawsuit that had ineffectively entered federal court.

“I want a whole day, a month. I will even settle in for a year. We don’t even have the date, time, place and even the apartment,” Brettler said.

“Concludingly, she’s not alleging this abuse,” he added later.

Judge Kaplan replied that it was “not a hunting dog”, telling Brettler that the prince would have the opportunity to uncover the charges further during the discovery process. He added that at least one allegation in the lawsuit is fairly specific.

“On one occasion, Prince Andrew sexually abused Plaintiff in London at Maxwell’s home,” a passage from complaint against Andrew’s allegations. “During this meeting, Epstein, Maxwell and Prince Andrew forced Plaintiff, a child, to have sex with Prince Andrew against her will.”

Referring to the former President Bill ClintonJudge Kaplan quipped that there is no certainty about the term “intercourse” at least “because someone else was already in the White House.” Judge Kaplan was appointed by Bill Clinton.

Giuffre’s attorney David Boies argued that the settlement was “irrelevant”, describing it as a public relations maneuver by the prince’s legal team.

“The release makes no mention of Prince Andrew,” Boies told Law & Crime on Monday. “He didn’t even know about it. He cannot be a ‘potential defendant’ in the settled case against Jeffrey Epstein both because he is out of Florida jurisdiction and because the Florida case involves federal claims he not part of it. “

Giuffre’s legal team expanded on those arguments in court.

“We will admit from the outset that ‘potential defendants’ is a term capable of having more than one interpretation,” Boies said, adding that the most likely explanation involves a person something under the jurisdiction of Florida.

Boies also argued that the deal was only for Epstein to enforce. Judge Kaplan appeared to agree, noting that the agreement was meant to be confidential, creating a practical barrier for third parties to know about it, let alone enforce it.

[Photos: LINDSEY PARNABY/AFP via Getty Images (left); Virginia Giuffre’s lawsuit (right)]

Is there a trick we should know? [email protected]

https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/not-a-dog-thats-going-to-hunt-judge-appears-skeptical-of-prince-andrews-attempt-to-dismiss-suit-accusing-him-of-sexually-abusing-a-17-year-old/ Prince Andrew tries to dismiss Virginia Giuffre’s lawsuit

Ian Walker

TheHiu.com is an automatic aggregator of the all world’s media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, all materials to their authors. If you are the owner of the content and do not want us to publish your materials, please contact us by email – admin@thehiu.com. The content will be deleted within 24 hours.

Related Articles

Back to top button