The Prince Andrew and Jeffrey Epstein Controversy 1: 2010-2022

[US Royal Watcher]

Originally Posted by King of the Jungle

I wonder why Vicki Ward didn't call the police long ago?
Some girls might have been spared their suffering.
Her account shows Epstein to be a very dangerous, deviant and manipulative man. She was clearly afraid of him herself.
It seems that Vicki saw her only options as publishing the dreadful details that she had been told or not publishing them.

I wondered the same thing. Regardless of what Vicki Ward did, I would have contacted the authorities if my daughter were involved. Perhaps it was frightening but I would rather trust the police to protect me and my family rather than allow someone to sexually abuse my child.

Originally Posted by Isabella

According to a study that I've heard mentioned many times recently, approximately 3% of rape/sexual assault accusations are false (though I've also heard a figure saying that it's between 2% and 8% - those two numbers apparently come from the United States Department of Justice and the FBI). Unfortunately, I don't recall which specific study the 3% number came from, but it's one I've heard most frequently cited in light of a lot of recent rape discussions (Bill Cosby, UVA, etc.). I tried to do a bit of googling on the subject just now, and it seems that many take most of these studies with a grain of salt. However, yes, in the grand scheme of things, false claims seem quite rare. In fact, the vast majority of incidents of sexual assault that do occur aren't reported to law enforcement. So claiming to be a victim of rape isn't exactly something that most women are particularly eager to do. And most women know that they're opening themselves up to a lot of scrutiny and victim-blaming by doing so.

That said, I have no idea what's happened in this case. Of course, I hope the allegations against Andrew aren't true. It does seem he's exercised some bad judgment in terms of his choice of friends - which isn't a crime, of course, just extremely unfortunate.

Thanks. I did some googling last night and found this report, which discusses the difficulties in determining exactly how to determine whether a report is false. It concluded that 5.9% of sexual assault reports are false but acknowledges several other studies show a smaller percentage of false reporting. www.icdv.idaho.gov/conference/handouts/False-Allegations.pdf

I think that the allegations against Prince Andrew and Dershowitz are not same type of sexual assault. There is no doubt that Epstein sexually abused the girls, but I don't think that means that every man who had sex with them is a rapist.

Assuming that if Jane Doe #3 was 17 years old (over the age of consent in most jurisdictions) and had sex with Andrew, does the fact that Epstein forced her into prostitution mean that Andrew is a rapist? Jane Doe's scumbag father said she was excited about meeting Andrew, does it follow that he would have had to force himself on her? Most prostitutes are being coerced but is every man who uses a prostitute guilty of sexual assault? The men are scum bags, but I wouldn't call them rapists.

Regarding Dershowitz suit, the affidavit is interesting. The private plane would have passenger manifests. It will cast doubt on Jane Doe's credibility if Dershowitz can use those manifests to prove that he was only on the private island once with his wife and daughter. But what if several eyewitnesses come forward to allege he was at the New Mexico house more than once?

The problem with these types of allegations is that it boils down to he said/she said. I can decide who I want to believe but I could be wrong. That is what makes these types of cases very difficult to prosecute.

[US Royal Watcher]

Originally Posted by Dman

I guess Andrew will just bury his head in the sand on these allegations?

The palace has issued several forceful denials. Are you suggesting that he should file a lawsuit?

Even if the allegations are false, it may be very hard for Andrew to disprove them. I doubt if he was on the private island with his daughters sleeping in the same room. There is at least one witness to Andrew being present during some of the unsavory pool parties. Filing a lawsuit would just keep the headlines going and what if he loses?

[Dman]

Originally Posted by US Royal Watcher

The palace has issued several forceful denials. Are you suggesting that he should file a lawsuit?

Even if the allegations are false, it may be very hard for Andrew to disprove them. I doubt if he was on the private island with his daughters sleeping in the same room. There is at least one witness to Andrew being present during some of the unsavory pool parties. Filing a lawsuit would just keep the headlines going and what if he loses?

Being accused of stuff like this is pretty serious. I'd do just about anything to clear my name from these accusations. Lack of action on Andrew's part will just be another attempt to sweep the dirty dishes under the palace carpet. His reputation is on the line once again, although it's been damaged enough.

[US Royal Watcher]

Originally Posted by Dman

Being accused of stuff like this is pretty serious. I'd do just about anything to clear my name from these accusations. Lack of action on Andrew's part will just be another attempt to sweep the dirty dishes under the palace carpet. His reputation is on the line once again, although it's been damaged enough.

Let's try thinking this through. In order to win a lawsuit against the allegations, Prince Andrew has to prove they aren't true. Ask yourself, how can he do that.

We know that Prince Andrew met the young woman in question. It is undeniable. There is a picture of them together. Unlike Dershowitz, Prince Andrew apparently didn't have his family with him when he went to the private island. Do you honestly think that he has witnesses who can PROVE that he was never alone with her by accounting for every minute he was on the island? I don't.

So what will happen in court. Prince Andrew will testify that he wasn't alone with her and she will say he was. Even if he's telling the truth, he could still lose. If he loses, many people will think that it is a confirmation that he is guilty and his reputation will suffer more.

[Rudolph]

Duke of York's accuser Virginia Roberts sues Harvard law professor - Telegraph

A woman who claims to have had underage sex with prominent US criminal defence lawyer Alan Dershowitz has filed a counter defamation lawsuit against him.

Former federal judge Paul Cassell and Florida plaintiffs attorney Bradley Edwards filed the lawsuit in a Florida circuit court, accusing Mr Dershowitz of initiating a public media assault on Virginia Roberts's reputation and character, according to court documents.

In a filing in Florida federal court last week, Mr Cassell and Mr Edwards said their client Ms Roberts, who is identified as Jane Doe #3, was forced as a minor by financier Jeffrey Epstein to have sex with several people, including Dershowitz and Britain's Prince Andrew.

[US Royal Watcher]

Originally Posted by Rudolph

Duke of York's accuser Virginia Roberts sues Harvard law professor - Telegraph

If Dershowitz wins the suit, it will help Prince Andrew's reputation but if he loses, it will be worse.

I don't know if Dershowitz felt he had any choice though. He's a smart lawyer so I find it hard to believe he was on the private island without his family, since that can be easily shown by the private jet manifest (I assume there wasn't another way to get to the island). If the manifests proves that he was there for one night with his wife and daughter, then I think it will be a major blow to Jane Doe's credibility.

[GracieGiraffe]

Originally Posted by US Royal Watcher

Let's try thinking this through. In order to win a lawsuit against the allegations, Prince Andrew has to prove they aren't true. Ask yourself, how can he do that.

We know that Prince Andrew met the young woman in question. It is undeniable. There is a picture of them together. Unlike Dershowitz, Prince Andrew apparently didn't have his family with him when he went to the private island. Do you honestly think that he has witnesses who can PROVE that he was never alone with her by accounting for every minute he was on the island? I don't.

So what will happen in court. Prince Andrew will testify that he wasn't alone with her and she will say he was. Even if he's telling the truth, he could still lose. If he loses, many people will think that it is a confirmation that he is guilty and his reputation will suffer more.

Not only that but during a deposition the attorneys can ask Andrew a wide array of questions - including a lot of particulars about the exact nature of his relationship with Epstein, questions on how many visits, where, who else was there, massages, etc.

Even if he has nothing to hide with regards to Roberts and any other minor, I doubt he wants to divulge these ancillary matters - in other words, he'll win the battle but lose the war.

[Moonmaiden23]

Originally Posted by Dman

'I'm not going to answer that': Zara Phillips dodges questions on the sex scandal allegations surrounding her uncle Prince Andrew at equestrian event Down Under-
'I'm not going to answer that': Zara Phillips dodges questions on the sex scandal allegations surrounding her uncle Prince Andrew at equestrian event Down Under* | Daily Mail Online

Why would someone be stupid enough to try to question ZARA??

[Princess of Durham]

I hope if Roberts is not yet again being led astray, but by her lawyers this time. I do believe her motive is money and that can be very tempting to keep going. I'm just wondering if this is a case of lawyers comparing who has the bigger d*ck and trying to take down someone like Dershowitz, of course they could also be completely taken in by a compulsive liar. OR, of course, she could be telling the truth, however at the very least I suspect there is a great deal of "embellishment" to her story.

[US Royal Watcher]

Originally Posted by Moonmaiden23

Why would someone be stupid enough to try to question ZARA??

Not just stupid. Mean. What is Zara supposed to say? The reporters are trying to put the royal family on the defensive. Regardless of what happened, Andrew is an adult and there is no evidence any other member of the royal family was involved.

[royalistbert]

Exactly Andrew is an adult. He has made his bed and must now lie in it.

Originally Posted by Princess of Durham

I hope if Roberts is not yet again being led astray, but by her lawyers this time. I do believe her motive is money and that can be very tempting to keep going. I'm just wondering if this is a case of lawyers comparing who has the bigger d*ck and trying to take down someone like Dershowitz, of course they could also be completely taken in by a compulsive liar. OR, of course, she could be telling the truth, however at the very least I suspect there is a great deal of "embellishment" to her story.

Someone is telling a lie but whatever the result the damage has already been done.

[US Royal Watcher]

Originally Posted by Princess of Durham

I hope if Roberts is not yet again being led astray, but by her lawyers this time. I do believe her motive is money and that can be very tempting to keep going. I'm just wondering if this is a case of lawyers comparing who has the bigger d*ck and trying to take down someone like Dershowitz, of course they could also be completely taken in by a compulsive liar. OR, of course, she could be telling the truth, however at the very least I suspect there is a great deal of "embellishment" to her story.

Dershowitz is not an idiot. I doubt that he would have filed an affidavit if he couldn't prove that he was only on the island once with his wife and daughter. Unless there was another way to get on the island, the plane's manifest should settle it. He also has to know that the U.S. government has the plane's manifest and the lawyers for Jane Doe #3 can access it. If it turns out he was on the island more than that once, his credibility would take a major hit.

I suppose it is possible that Dershowitz slipped away from his family for a rendezvous but it is hard to believe. Although there are men that would find it would add an element of "danger," most wouldn't risk it with their wife and daughter so close by. It would be interesting to know if Jane Doe said anything about the wife and daughter being there. If not, that would also undermine her credibility because I think that would be a memorable detail.

[Ridderzaal]

Of course The Dirty Duke will not lay charges.
He certainly does not want to stand up in a court as he knows all kinds of other things will then surface.
This is becoming a nightmare for the beloved Queen and I pray that it will not affect her health negatively in any way.

[Roslyn]

Originally Posted by royalistbert

Exactly Andrew is an adult. He has made his bed and must now lie in it.

Oh, I doubt he made the bed!

C'mon; someone had to say it.

[GracieGiraffe]

Originally Posted by Roslyn

Oh, I doubt he made the bed!

C'mon; someone had to say it.

If she suggested it, we'd know she was a liar then!

[Mermaid1962]

The reporter was likely hoping to catch her off-guard, get an off-the-cuff remark, and make a headline out of it. I'm guessing that everyone in the Windsor clan and their close friends have been told to say nothing.

Originally Posted by Moonmaiden23

Why would someone be stupid enough to try to question ZARA??

[Meadow]

The problem with the she is only doing it for money is that she was offered money and lot's of it by Epstein years ago. If that is all she wanted why wouldn't she have taken it then? She now has her name all over the press and her reputation is being pulled apart. She knew this would happen if she went ahead with the lawsuit. Her lawyers aren't dummies either and I would think they would have some sort of proof to back up their story besides their client. I find it pretty remarkable that he always seems to have had his wife and daughter with him on these business trips on the dates she is saying. Not exactly unbiased third party. Andrew can put his head in the sand all he wants this isn't going to go away anytime soon. More allegations will come out and then when the court case happens even more will. Problem for Andrew is he did meet the girl it's a fact, he did party in all the places she claims with Epstein, another witness has said he swam with naked young girls, five other victims of Epstein refused to answer questions about Prince Andrew and there are two Jane Doe's so who is the other one and what is she claiming? Civil court isn't like criminal you don't have to prove as much this I fear is going to get far worse not just for Andrew either.

[US Royal Watcher]

Originally Posted by Meadow

The problem with the she is only doing it for money is that she was offered money and lot's of it by Epstein years ago. If that is all she wanted why wouldn't she have taken it then? She now has her name all over the press and her reputation is being pulled apart. She knew this would happen if she went ahead with the lawsuit. Her lawyers aren't dummies either and I would think they would have some sort of proof to back up their story besides their client. I find it pretty remarkable that he always seems to have had his wife and daughter with him on these business trips on the dates she is saying. Not exactly unbiased third party. Andrew can put his head in the sand all he wants this isn't going to go away anytime soon. More allegations will come out and then when the court case happens even more will. Problem for Andrew is he did meet the girl it's a fact, he did party in all the places she claims with Epstein, another witness has said he swam with naked young girls, five other victims of Epstein refused to answer questions about Prince Andrew and there are two Jane Doe's so who is the other one and what is she claiming? Civil court isn't like criminal you don't have to prove as much this I fear is going to get far worse not just for Andrew either.

You have a point about the money. Jane Doe is not suing Prince Andrew or Alan Dershowitz. It is too late. She is actually suing the US Attorney's office (the prosecutor in the case). She is probably honestly upset about the plea bargain. I know I would be.

Her lawyers have an obligation to help her put forth her claims. Although there is some obligation to research them to avoid wasting court time, it is not the requirement--that's why most people don't think Dershowitz will be successful in having the attorneys disbarred.

There is another issue for Dershowitz: he submitted an affidavit and could be charged with perjury if it were false. Jane Doe also submitted affidavits, but if it turns out she is lying, she probably wouldn't be charged with perjury. She is a victim of child sexual assault and judges would be sympathetic to her.

On the other hand, if it turns out that Dershowitz is trying to intimidate the witnesses, there would be little sympathy for him and he could be facing criminal charges.

We still don't have all the facts but I just can't believe Dershowitz is that stupid, whereas Jane Doe is probably less sophisticated in the legal arena. It's also possible that she is suffering from false memories.

[ROYAL NORWAY]

Originally Posted by Ridderzaal

This is becoming a nightmare for the beloved Queen and I pray that it will not affect her health negatively in any way.

I hope not. She has fortunately good experience with her childrens many scandals, but she is almost 90.

[Roslyn]

Originally Posted by Moonmaiden23

Why would someone be stupid enough to try to question ZARA??

Possibly hoping to elicit a response along the lines of the "Naff off!" that her mother said to a reporter some years ago. The Queen's granddaughter blowing up at the press would be great fodder for the evening news here.

Originally Posted by Ridderzaal

This is becoming a nightmare for the beloved Queen and I pray that it will not affect her health negatively in any way.

I think that's a fair concern in view of her age. When my mother was in her late 80s she had to deal with some very difficult issues relating to my brother and his last wife, and it had an deleterious effect on her health.