The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #2501  
Old 11-12-2019, 07:44 AM
Madame Verseau's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Louisville, United States
Posts: 1,537
Giuffre is being sued for defamation of character

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usa...amp/2529869001

Alan Dershowitz is bringing the suit claiming she's lying about him and others including Andrew. I can see Dershowitz filing for himself but why bring in Andrew? Is he trying to protect the whole group? This only ties Andrew into this mess more.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #2502  
Old 11-12-2019, 08:10 AM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Middlewich, United Kingdom
Posts: 20,279
The Prince Andrew and Jeffrey Epstein Controversy (2010-2019)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Madame Verseau View Post
Giuffre is being sued for defamation of character

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usa...amp/2529869001

Alan Dershowitz is bringing the suit claiming she's lying about him and others including Andrew. I can see Dershowitz filing for himself but why bring in Andrew? Is he trying to protect the whole group? This only ties Andrew into this mess more.


According to the article, Dershowitz isn’t bringing Andrew into it, he’s filling for himself. It’s the article writers that mix Andrews name in it.
__________________

__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #2503  
Old 11-12-2019, 09:45 AM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 15,775
As I said before, the men and women who used and abused these young girls for sex will always get the upper hand.
__________________
"WE CANNOT PRAY IN LOVE AND LIVE IN HATE AND STILL THINK WE ARE WORSHIPING GOD."

A.W. TOZER
Reply With Quote
  #2504  
Old 11-12-2019, 03:58 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 14,198
Its not about having the "upper hand". Its about doing things in a legal manner through the justice system.

Well... one way that Dershowitz does have a bit of an advantage is that he's not going to have to shell out a huge amount of money for lawyers to present his case. He'll probably represent himself.

It'll be up to Giuffre to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she was telling the truth in her statements about Dershowitz. That is not going to be easy. One cannot make statements publicly about someone and just expect it to be taken as a gospel truth. It needs to be proven and in this case, Dershowitz wouldn't even have filed a lawsuit unless he knows he has a good assurance he can win in court.

It also sets a precedence that defamation of character lawsuits can and will be filed against false statements. It kind of makes me think that this is exactly the "threat from the palace" that kept that Giuffre interview off the air about Andrew.

This will be interesting to watch to see what happens.
__________________
No law can be sacred to me but that of my nature. Good and bad are but names very readily transferable to that or this; the only right is what is after my constitution, the only wrong what is against it.

~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
  #2505  
Old 11-12-2019, 04:04 PM
HighGoalHighDreams's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Unspecified, United States
Posts: 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
Well... one way that Dershowitz does have a bit of an advantage is that he's not going to have to shell out a huge amount of money for lawyers to present his case. He'll probably represent himself.
If he does, he'll have a fool for a client.
Reply With Quote
  #2506  
Old 11-15-2019, 03:20 AM
eya eya is offline
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: -, Greece
Posts: 17,721
"WORLD EXCLUSIVE: In a #Newsnight @BBCTwo interview recorded yesterday at Buckingham Palace, Emily Maitlis talks to Prince Andrew about his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein - the first time he’s answered questions on the scandal"


https://twitter.com/BBCNewsnight/sta...577025/photo/1
Reply With Quote
  #2507  
Old 11-15-2019, 06:38 AM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Middlewich, United Kingdom
Posts: 20,279
No questions were vetted beforehand either;

https://twitter.com/maitlis/status/1...451196416?s=21

This is a big big move.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #2508  
Old 11-15-2019, 06:51 AM
rob2008's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumutqueen View Post
No questions were vetted beforehand either;

https://twitter.com/maitlis/status/1...451196416?s=21

This is a big big move.

This interview is going to put an end to the campaign against Andrew - and stop the persecution of him.
Reply With Quote
  #2509  
Old 11-15-2019, 07:09 AM
Elenath's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Nuth, Netherlands
Posts: 690
Quote:
Originally Posted by rob2008 View Post
This interview is going to put an end to the campaign against Andrew - and stop the persecution of him.
Why? Do we know what he said?
Reply With Quote
  #2510  
Old 11-15-2019, 07:25 AM
Madame Verseau's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Louisville, United States
Posts: 1,537
The BBC interview should be interesting but at the end of the day the interviews that really matter are ones with the FBI and procesutors of the Southern District of New York (with counsel present as would be his right). US law enforcement will not stop looking at Andrew based on a TV interview; it would be based on their investigations. Talking to the Feds would be a better legal and PR strategy.
Reply With Quote
  #2511  
Old 11-15-2019, 07:56 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,062
I don't believe for one second that he sat down in front of her with no prior knowledge of the quedtions and fully rehearsed answers. The Palace would never take such a risk.
Reply With Quote
  #2512  
Old 11-15-2019, 08:02 AM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Middlewich, United Kingdom
Posts: 20,279
Quote:
Originally Posted by sophie25 View Post
I don't believe for one second that he sat down in front of her with no prior knowledge of the quedtions and fully rehearsed answers. The Palace would never take such a risk.


Then you have a BBC journalist openly lying to millions of people. I don’t think the BBC or Emily would take that risk either.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Madame Verseau View Post
The BBC interview should be interesting but at the end of the day the interviews that really matter are ones with the FBI and procesutors of the Southern District of New York (with counsel present as would be his right). US law enforcement will not stop looking at Andrew based on a TV interview; it would be based on their investigations. Talking to the Feds would be a better legal and PR strategy.


US Law Enforcement won’t stop looking for what exactly? Why would Andrew talk to the Feds when he’s not accused of anything?
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #2513  
Old 11-15-2019, 08:29 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,062
Where's the risk for the BBC? The Palace are hardly going to report them. If his answers are not scripted to within an inch of their lives I'll eat my hat and it will be obvious if they are.
Reply With Quote
  #2514  
Old 11-15-2019, 09:06 AM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Middlewich, United Kingdom
Posts: 20,279
Quote:
Originally Posted by sophie25 View Post
Where's the risk for the BBC? The Palace are hardly going to report them. If his answers are not scripted to within an inch of their lives I'll eat my hat and it will be obvious if they are.


No but the people would. If it’s a lie, and it’s scripted and he was aware of the questions then the BBC and their reporter have lied. They would be crucified, and they’re already under severe scrutiny.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #2515  
Old 11-15-2019, 09:19 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Philadelphia, United States
Posts: 4,942
Quote:
Originally Posted by sophie25 View Post
Where's the risk for the BBC? The Palace are hardly going to report them. If his answers are not scripted to within an inch of their lives I'll eat my hat and it will be obvious if they are.
I agree!
Andrew is a bumbler; if left to his own devices he is sure to make matters worse. The Palace won't take such a risk.
Reply With Quote
  #2516  
Old 11-15-2019, 09:38 AM
ACO ACO is offline
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 2,414
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumutqueen View Post
No questions were vetted beforehand either;

https://twitter.com/maitlis/status/1...451196416?s=21

This is a big big move.
No questions vetted? Yeah I doubt it. She better come swinging then and nothing soft or everyone will see right through it.
Reply With Quote
  #2517  
Old 11-15-2019, 10:33 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by ACO View Post
No questions vetted? Yeah I doubt it. She better come swinging then and nothing soft or everyone will see right through it.
She can quite tough/and or aggressive depending on your view. She has written a book recently called Airhead which is a behind the scenes look at tv reporting.

I don’t think she will left him off with soft evasive answers.
Reply With Quote
  #2518  
Old 11-15-2019, 11:22 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 14,198
What matters is that Andrew has sat down and agreed to be interviewed on the matter and that will be aired publicly. As this interview is being done by the BBC, which actually means reputable to me and not some "talking heads" tabloid type television presentation, I expect the questions to be done in a respectful manner that Andrew will answer to the best of his knowledge. This isn't an interview to create a sensation that adds to a scandal but rather Andrew being given the chance to air his side of the whole thing.

As far as the criminal cases being investigated by the FBI, I don't believe that Andrew is going to be any part of their ongoing investigation into who may have aided and abetted Epstein in his alleged crimes of sex trafficking. They *may* however want to talk with Andrew about those that they're investigating that Andrew has known and been friends with. Ghislaine Maxwell comes to mind but it would be *her* they're looking into to possibly press criminal charges against her and not Andrew. Andrew simply may be able to give them information they didn't know of but any information coming from Andrew would be attained in a voluntary manner rather than an interrogation. At least that's how I see it.
__________________
No law can be sacred to me but that of my nature. Good and bad are but names very readily transferable to that or this; the only right is what is after my constitution, the only wrong what is against it.

~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
  #2519  
Old 11-15-2019, 12:44 PM
ACO ACO is offline
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 2,414
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katymcwaity View Post
She can quite tough/and or aggressive depending on your view. She has written a book recently called Airhead which is a behind the scenes look at tv reporting.

I don’t think she will left him off with soft evasive answers.
I guess we will see. I hope she is tough on him. If not than this is just another failed PR stunt to add to his others around this case. If he is going to sit down and talk about it... then do it.
Reply With Quote
  #2520  
Old 11-15-2019, 03:54 PM
HighGoalHighDreams's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Unspecified, United States
Posts: 281
I suppose there are ways in which it could technically be true that no questions were vetted, but the parameters were so narrow that there need be no concern about what is coming.

No member of The Royal Family, in any context, gives an interview without knowing exactly the substance of what is coming. That tradition did not stop here, in this context.

Very deceptive of Emily Andrews to present this as if Andrew is going in cold, on a technical truth.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 7 (0 members and 7 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





Popular Tags
administrator aristocracy belgian royal belgian royal family chittagong countess of snowdon crown prince hussein's future wife crusades current events cypher danish royalty denmark duchess of cambridge duchess of sussex duke of sussex dutch history family search french royalty future wife of prince hussein germany greece house of bernadotte house of grimaldi house of orange-nassau jerusalem jumma kiko king philippe lithuania lithuanian palaces marriage mbs meghan markle monaco royal monarchist monarchy monogram mountbatten nelson mandela bay netflix nobel prize norway history norwegian royal family official visit pakistan potential areas prince charles prince daniel prince harry princely family of monaco princess benedikte qe2 queen mathilde queen paola rania of jordan romanov family rown shakespeare south korea spanish royal state visit state visit to denmark sweden swedish history trump united kingdom usa valois visit from sweden windy city


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:41 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2019
Jelsoft Enterprises
×