The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #4681  
Old 01-05-2022, 02:24 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,615
Andrew said he never met her so why would he think her agreement with Epstein should involve him in the first place?
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #4682  
Old 01-05-2022, 05:25 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 7,537
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lori138 View Post
I don't see how she could have as the agreement signed between her and Epstein would have scuttled any lawsuits. Personally, as others have said here, she may have been trafficked, but she did not leave this lifestyle until she was an adult and could have left sooner. She has already been paid millions of dollars, if not from Epstein, then from Maxwell and at this point to me she just looks like a gold digger, no matter who she is suing.
But now that Epstein is no longer alive and, per Judge Kaplan's logic, cannot enforce the settlement, why doesn't she also sue Bill Clinton, or Donald Trump, or any of her other prominent American clients (or abusers depending on the PoV) ? Do her lawyers perhaps think that an American jury is more likely to decide against a British prince, who is seen by most Americans as an entitled / privileged individual who lives off taxpayers' money?
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #4683  
Old 01-05-2022, 05:58 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,711
Quote:
Originally Posted by sophie25 View Post
Andrew said he never met her so why would he think her agreement with Epstein should involve him in the first place?
He didn't say he never met her, he said he coulld not recollect meeting her.
Reply With Quote
  #4684  
Old 01-05-2022, 08:20 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,615
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
But now that Epstein is no longer alive and, per Judge Kaplan's logic, cannot enforce the settlement, why doesn't she also sue Bill Clinton, or Donald Trump, or any of her other prominent American clients (or abusers depending on the PoV) ? Do her lawyers perhaps think that an American jury is more likely to decide against a British prince, who is seen by most Americans as an entitled / privileged individual who lives off taxpayers' money?
Did she ever say Clinton and Trump were involved with her?
Reply With Quote
  #4685  
Old 01-05-2022, 08:24 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,615
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
He didn't say he never met her, he said he coulld not recollect meeting her.
He absolutely denies her accusations so why would he think her deal with Epstein ought to include him?
Reply With Quote
  #4686  
Old 01-05-2022, 08:28 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Berlin, Germany
Posts: 685
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lori138 View Post
She has already been paid millions of dollars, if not from Epstein, then from Maxwell and at this point to me she just looks like a gold digger, no matter who she is suing.
Well, she might be out for revenge... But anyway, let's say this Andrew story is milked by her, only to make money... - So what? Does this make Prince Andrew an innocent victim, if he did what is claimed? Obviously not!

I think, it is somehow cool, this new sign of the times, that the downtrodden, the oppressed, can sue their oppressors and make a very fine living out of it.

This teaches the society discipline and keeps the mighty in check.
Reply With Quote
  #4687  
Old 01-05-2022, 08:35 PM
Moonmaiden23's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Los Angeles, United States
Posts: 11,007
So if PA loses this civil case, how are the plaintiff and her attorneys planning to collect?

Does Andrew have any money of his own or is it all in Trust for his children?

Royal Lodge belongs to the Crown. They cannot touch it.

How much leeway does the American justice system have in Britain against a member of the Royal family?
__________________
"Be who God intended you to be, and you will set the world on fire" St. Catherine of Siena

"If your dreams don't scare you, they are not big enough" Sir Sidney Poitier
1927-2022
Reply With Quote
  #4688  
Old 01-05-2022, 09:11 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 7,537
Quote:
Originally Posted by sophie25 View Post
Did she ever say Clinton and Trump were involved with her?
I donít think so, but they were associated with Epstein. Anyway, I mentioned them figuratively. The point was that she is only suing Andrew now because he may be the easiest target. The settlement will no longer be an excuse not to sue other potential defendants if the judge rules it cannot be enforced.
Reply With Quote
  #4689  
Old 01-05-2022, 09:32 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: St Thomas, U.S. Minor Outlying Islands
Posts: 4,355
Quote:
Originally Posted by sophie25 View Post
He absolutely denies her accusations so why would he think her deal with Epstein ought to include him?
Because of the words of the deal, specifically the clause referring to "other potential defendants". You will find the full text of the deal at this link https://storage.courtlistener.com/re...64713.32.1.pdf and a summary of his (counsel's) interpretation of it at this link https://news.sky.com/story/prince-an...wsuit-12508943.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Hallo girl View Post
Excuse my lack of knowledge could somebody explain to me the statute of limitations, the timeframes and the relevance in these particular circumstances.
From the Sky News link:

Quote:
New York State's Child Victims Act was signed into law by Governor Andrew Cuomo in 2019. This allowed for survivors of childhood sexual abuse to file a case which had already been time-barred.

A year was given for this action to take place, which was extended again due to disruption during the COVID pandemic.

Quote:
Originally Posted by US Royal Watcher View Post
The only reason to delay filing is because she was worried that exculpatory evidence would come to light earlier.
There are other potential reasons, first and foremost that the Duke of York's ill-advised 2019 interview (as well as the charges of sex trafficking later filed against his close friend) could bolster the credibility of her recollections. There was at least one YouGov poll indicating that in the aftermath of the Duke's Newsnight interview, the number of Britons who credit Virginia Giuffre's allegations about him had substantially increased compared to 2015.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
I donít think so, but they were associated with Epstein. Anyway, I mentioned them figuratively. The point was that she is only suing Andrew now because he may be the easiest target. The settlement will no longer be an excuse not to sue other potential defendants if the judge rules it cannot be enforced.
Indeed, she has not accused any former US presidents. As discussed earlier, Ms. Giuffre did file suit against a prominent professor and legal analyst to whom she says she was trafficked (he strongly denies her allegation).
Reply With Quote
  #4690  
Old 01-05-2022, 09:54 PM
Moonmaiden23's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Los Angeles, United States
Posts: 11,007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
I donít think so, but they were associated with Epstein. Anyway, I mentioned them figuratively. The point was that she is only suing Andrew now because he may be the easiest target. The settlement will no longer be an excuse not to sue other potential defendants if the judge rules it cannot be enforced.
I agree. It will never happen but I would love for someone to ask her on the record why, of all the scores of famous powerful and wealthy men...men richer by far than Andrew , what made her decide that QEII's second son was the one to pursue in court.

Probably because she knew that only Andrew was foolish enough to be photographed with her. That made it simpler.

I know she also went after Alan Dershowitz but for reasons that are not clear he threatened her and she dropped it.
__________________
"Be who God intended you to be, and you will set the world on fire" St. Catherine of Siena

"If your dreams don't scare you, they are not big enough" Sir Sidney Poitier
1927-2022
Reply With Quote
  #4691  
Old 01-05-2022, 11:55 PM
Leopoldine's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 940
Quote:
Originally Posted by sophie25 View Post
Andrew said he never met her so why would he think her agreement with Epstein should involve him in the first place?

A salient point.
Reply With Quote
  #4692  
Old 01-06-2022, 12:56 AM
Alisa's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: , United States
Posts: 3,135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonmaiden23 View Post
So if PA loses this civil case, how are the plaintiff and her attorneys planning to collect?



Does Andrew have any money of his own or is it all in Trust for his children?



Royal Lodge belongs to the Crown. They cannot touch it.



How much leeway does the American justice system have in Britain against a member of the Royal family?
I think Andrew does have some private funds stashed away some place. For years he has smooched with the Łber wealthy. Like most people he probably wants to pass something along to his descendants.
__________________
Those who plot the destruction of others often perish in the attempt. ---Phaedrus
Reply With Quote
  #4693  
Old 01-06-2022, 05:53 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 11,753
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
He didn't say he never met her, he said he coulld not recollect meeting her.

That is not what the Duke said. He stated he has no recollection of having met Ms Roberts. That is what we all experience, as I have absolutely no recollection who sat next to me on my flight from Amsterdam to Barcelona, and who sat next to me on the return flight. But I can not deny I possibly have met a person X or a person Y who sat next to me -for three hours- on Seat 6E.


It is the Duke's legal team which does what it has to do and they pointed to an agreement Ms Roberts had made with Mr Epstein: settle all and everything for half a million US Dollars.
Reply With Quote
  #4694  
Old 01-06-2022, 09:08 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Falls Church, United States
Posts: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
That is not what the Duke said. He stated he has no recollection of having met Ms Roberts. That is what we all experience, as I have absolutely no recollection who sat next to me on my flight from Amsterdam to Barcelona, and who sat next to me on the return flight. But I can not deny I possibly have met a person X or a person Y who sat next to me -for three hours- on Seat 6E.


.
I work at the same bank for 15 years and the number of people acting like I remember them is staggering. All the electronic systems back up that I have helped them multiple times but no I donít remember them at all. Itís a 9 to 5 for me. Canít imagine how much worse that would be for a member of the BRF to remember someone from 20 years ago. Silly season right there.
Reply With Quote
  #4695  
Old 01-06-2022, 09:27 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Falls Church, United States
Posts: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hallo girl View Post
Excuse my lack of knowledge could somebody explain to me the statute of limitations, the timeframes and the relevance in these particular circumstances.
The statute of limitations is one in which can limit the time frame to sue a person for an action because memory fades and witness day and what have you. In the name of timely justice . The original statue of limitations had passed on this but NY governor cumo extended the limitations to one additional year. Virginia had filed her lawsuit a few days before that year was up. The issue now is bank records are destroyed after 7 years, the body guard has died and royal protection records are destroyed after 2 years. If the suit was filled earlier we might have all these things
Reply With Quote
  #4696  
Old 01-06-2022, 11:18 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,615
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyRaven View Post
I work at the same bank for 15 years and the number of people acting like I remember them is staggering. All the electronic systems back up that I have helped them multiple times but no I donít remember them at all. Itís a 9 to 5 for me. Canít imagine how much worse that would be for a member of the BRF to remember someone from 20 years ago. Silly season right there.
I'm sure you would remember a customer you had sex with.
Reply With Quote
  #4697  
Old 01-06-2022, 11:33 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 17,040
Quote:
Originally Posted by sophie25 View Post
I'm sure you would remember a customer you had sex with.
Not necessarily. Not if, for example, Giuffre was just one of Epstein's girls that Andrew had intimate relations with. Like I've said before, Andrew could have just seen it as a "perk" of being friends with Epstein/Maxwell. Like a box of cigars on the nightstand or a bottle of scotch. This kind of sex doesn't involve the emotions but is just purely physical lust being satiated.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
Reply With Quote
  #4698  
Old 01-06-2022, 11:47 AM
Claire's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,728
Don't you think that the prosecutors would have pulled them, if its a them out of the woodwork by now. Or heavily suggested it - to several outlets of the media.

I was listening to a podcast that noted that the purpose of this case was to pull one figurehead to trial to scapegoat for all the others that should be there. And that this was the prefect scapegoat as no American political party will get their hands dirty with the outcome. Even getting any anything out the courts will a victory to the prosecutor, as money for the victims was not the purpose of it. It was to pretend to care about the victims of the Epstein case, when most politicians, financers and Hollywood big honchos really don't give a nod. It was even noted that the prosecutor should be accepting a pay check from Rupert Murddock. This was such a perfect outcome for so many people.
Reply With Quote
  #4699  
Old 01-06-2022, 01:47 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,711
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
That is not what the Duke said. He stated he has no recollection of having met Ms Roberts. That is what we all experience, as I have absolutely no recollection who sat next to me on my flight from Amsterdam to Barcelona, and who sat next to me on the return flight. But I can not deny I possibly have met a person X or a person Y who sat next to me -for three hours- on Seat 6E.


It is the Duke's legal team which does what it has to do and they pointed to an agreement Ms Roberts had made with Mr Epstein: settle all and everything for half a million US Dollars.
yes that is what I said. He claimed that he did not reccollect meeting her. However the picture proves that he did meet her.. and hada photo taken. He may or may not have had sex with her...
Reply With Quote
  #4700  
Old 01-06-2022, 02:42 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Washington, United States
Posts: 1,776
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hallo girl View Post
Excuse my lack of knowledge could somebody explain to me the statute of limitations, the timeframes and the relevance in these particular circumstances.
I hope I explain this correctly but I can count on other lawyers on the forum to help out if I get something wrong.

Laws for time periods to bring a civil law suit (statutes of limitations) vary from country to country and even within the United States, depending on which area you live in. But it is important to know that according to Wikipedia, Virginia Giuffre was born on August 9, 1983. She is alleging that Andrew had sex with her in New York, London, and the Virgin Islands, when she was 17 (2000 and/or 2001).

There are legal limits on how long someone has to file a civil law suit for events that have happened in the past. There are several reasons to prohibit people from filing lawsuits for old cases: memories fade, physical evidence gets damaged or lost, and we want to prevent courts from being overrun with lawsuits for events that happened long ago.

Up until recently, the statute of limittions in New York prohibited alleged child victims of sexual assault from filing a lawsuit after their 23rd birthday. So under prior law, the statute of limitations for Ms. Giuffre's case expired on August 8, 2006.

However, since many victims argued that they were too traumatized or frightened to file a lawsuit before they turned 23, New York passed a law that gave sexual assault victims until August 14, 2021 to file a claim if the statute of limitations had already expired. That is the law Andrew claims is unconstitutional because it wasn't in place when the event allegedly took place.

Additionally, because Ms. Giuffre was a resident of Florida and was taken to other states (and the UK), she had 10 years after her 18th birthday to file a federal lawsuit. So she could have filed a lawsuit in federal court until August 8, 2012.

I also note that my understanding is that the age of consent in New York, the Virgin Islands, and London was 16 at the time of the alleged events. I assume that she is arguing that Andrew was aware she was a trafficking victim but I find that hard to believe.

I can see Epstein bragging about access to all the girls, but I can't see him going into a lot of detail as to how he's illegally bringing them to other jurisdictions. Andrew was friends with Epstein but I can't believe that Andrew was in Epstein's inner circle. In fact, I can more easily believe Epstein and Maxwell took pains to hide criminal activities because they would have been worried about Andrew's security team and government survelliance.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 10 (1 members and 9 guests)
Baylene
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
#uae #abudhabirullingfamily 18th birthday america american archie mountbatten-windsor asia birth braganza britain britannia british british royal family cadwallader camilla camilla's family camilla parker-bowles camilla parker bowles castile charles china chinese clarence house colorblindness coronation crown jewels de la cerda dresses dubai expo duchess of sussex duke of sussex family tree fashion and style gemstones george vi guzman harry and meghan history ingrid-alexandra ivrea japan japanese imperial family japan history kensington palace king edward iii king edward vii king henry iii lili mountbatten-windsor list of rulers medical mongolia norway crown princely couple orleans-braganza politics portugal prince charles prince harry prince of wales prince of wales in jordan queen victoria royal ancestry samurai solomon j solomon spanish royal family state visit st edward uae unfinished portrait united states wales welsh


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:06 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2022
Jelsoft Enterprises
×