Hope this goes as well his the Maitliss interview decision. 👍

I’m guessing he believes his royal charm can sway the jury?

I’m guessing that he won’t go any where near the courtroom. But that his expensive lawyers can outmuscle and outspend her lawyers, and therefore create enough confusion and doubt for him to get away with it.

All that money on lawyers and he goes and does this. He’ll be slopping out with Maxwell next. Did he misinterpret ‘doing bird’?

I imagine his lawyers think they can con a jury more easily than a judge.

I’d expect that he would have had to tratify in either case.

I’m guessing that he won’t go any where near the courtroom. But that his expensive lawyers can outmuscle and outspend her lawyers, and therefore create enough confusion and doubt for him to get away with it.

That worked well for Maxwell………

I’d have thought trial by jury, after you’ve basically filmed quite possibly the worst interview in history wouldn’t be a good idea, it reminds me of that Simpsons trial with Bart and mr burns!

BREAKING: In response to Prince Andrew requesting trial by jury, Virginia Giuffre has requested the heating be turned up really high x

— Laura Kuenssberg Translator (@BBCLauraKT) January 26, 2022

I think this is the poker equivalent of ‘All In’ .

They’re going to be arguing on minor technicalities. I even suspect the jury is going to be hit with, Americas long standing ally references

Looks like an aggressive move intended to put pressure on Giuffre.
I don’t think she’ll back off but…if she does and accepts an out of court settlement, if offered, she’ll be criticised but andrew is stuffed whatever he does.
Out of court settlement – he’s succeeded in buying her off; she was pressured into settling; everyone has their price.
In court – embarrassing personal details about him are disclosed/proven; irrespective of jury verdict, he further damages royal family. He’s clearly incapable of thinking on his feet and that, combined with his inbred arrogance, will look terrible and appearances/perceptions will matter in this.

I think that this is another moment of “maitliss interview” delusion from Andrew – or potentially he’s doubling-down to try to scare the royal family into their (financial?) support.

Personally, after watching his interview, I was left with the impression that he’s under the delusion that people would just unquestioningly accept whatever bullshit he came up with, tug their forelock, and be on their way. The fact that he did an interview that was so obviously going to be a car-crash, against the advice of his PR/press teams, demonstrates this. I think he believed he could just brass-it-out…. and this latest decision feels just like that.

Personally, after watching his interview, I was left with the impression that he’s under the delusion that people would just unquestioningly accept whatever bullshit he came up with, tug their forelock, and be on their way.

Same. His arrogance is staggering

Same. His arrogance is staggering

He’s being poorly advised as the lawyers are claiming he never had a friendship with Ms Maxwell, despite several papers stating that they dated in the past! It can only be a money thing now and he loses either way.

As much as I’d like to think it’s due to his hubris I reckon his lawyers just reckon they use obfuscation and technical legal doohickory to confuse a jury to return an inconclusive verdict

Should up the ante now and say for a jury trial, instead of civil, its made criminal.

I can see where his legal team is coming from on this. Technicalities indeed. She is going have an impossible time of knowing who exactly the photographer is and thats just a single point.

Also he’s saying this happened here, here and here , but NOT here, where you say the ‘abuse’ took place

Or the denial of events ever taking place, but in the clear due to the previous payout which included anyone else who did have sex with her, and although he denies he was one of them, that waiver includes him.

Whatever happens, the chances of him ever being asked to be patronage of the Girl Guides is absolutely zero.

I’m guessing that he won’t go any where near the courtroom. But that his expensive lawyers can outmuscle and outspend her lawyers, and therefore create enough confusion and doubt for him to get away with it.

Keep in mind that its a civil case – tested on the balance of probabilities and not every part of her action needs to succeed for her to “win”, its not like a criminal case where reasonable doubt or some critical point of the case could scupper everything else.

All that money on lawyers and he goes and does this. He’ll be slopping out with Maxwell next. Did he misinterpret ‘doing bird’?

Have you misunderstood what it means to ask for a jury in a US civil court case? I think she may also have suggested it should be a jury?

I don’t think she’ll back off but…if she does and accepts an out of court settlement, if offered, she’ll be criticised but andrew is stuffed whatever he does.

I’d be amazed if she backs down without at least a public admission that she was telling the truth (or at least that large parts of her account are accurate) and that there was some element of wrong doing on his part. I’d think its better for her to lose a jury case than settle for an undisclosed sum and no admission of wrong doing.

thestabiliser
Free Member

As much as I’d like to think it’s due to his hubris I reckon his lawyers just reckon they use obfuscation and technical legal doohickory to confuse a jury to return an inconclusive verdict

But it’s a civil case, it’s going to be theatrics and a lot of hearsay, and if Andrew does his honourable stuff again he’s going to look bad to the jury, confusing them will also just make the jury side with the American girl who’s on the other side

He’s being poorly advised as the lawyers are claiming he never had a friendship with Ms Maxwell, despite several papers stating that they dated in the past! It can only be a money thing now and he loses either way.

In fairness just because the press say it, doesn’t make it true! I think his wording was more specific than no friendship (that would be daft to claim – he invited them to Balmoral!) but no close friendship (or something suitably subjective!).

A significant chunk of Americans don’t think things have moved on since George III so the idea of a member of the UK royal family, partiularly one with a semi-detached view of his own self importance, requesting a jury trial is a joke (I realise that if he doesn’t settle that he won’t have a choice about a jury trial).

Who is advising him, how much are they getting paid, & can I apply for a job?

Radio 4 had an interview with an ex US prosecutor this morning. She pointed out the Ms Guiffre has already requested a jury trial, so Mr Windsor doing the same makes no difference – Ms Guiffre has the right to have this civil case tried by a jury.

She also thought the rest of the submission was very standard.

Surely this is master stroke. If her lawyers prove he was a close friend/associate of Epstein then he should be covered by the agreement she signed and the case thrown out.

If they don’t there is no way he could have known she was trafficked and the case thrown out.

Or this might just be posturing to lower any settlement.

Or shock horror he might not have known anything and simply had his picture taken when someone came up/was pushed towards him at a party. As a Prince I suspect he has had his picture taken with a lot of people and I suspect Epstein took many such pictures irrespective of if anything else happened so he could imply something might have happened if his associates ever turned against him.

Americast interviewed an excellent US lawyer recently and he talked through how things might pan out. He suggested the most likely outcome is the Andrew will default, basically not show up. He will be found guilty in his absence but without any form of trial. He will claim that that he would not have had a fair trial due to his profile and that is why he did not attend, so in his mind guilty on a technicality only. He will then use that to justify not paying up and good luck chasing his wealth from the US.

Even if he was to attend and be found not guilty, the publicity of a trial could potentially be worse that guilt through default.

Have you misunderstood what it means to ask for a jury in a US civil court case? I think she may also have suggested it should be a jury?

Radio 4 had an interview with an ex US prosecutor this morning. She pointed out the Ms Guiffre has already requested a jury trial, so Mr Windsor doing the same makes no difference

yes, I heard similar on R6 news this morning. She said all Andrew Windsor had done is agree to it.

II like this bit from the BBC website “On the matter of a photograph of the prince with his arm around Ms Giuffre, with Maxwell in the background, his lawyers say they do not have enough information to admit or deny its existence.”

Um guys, scroll up a bit and the photo is there. So yes, it does exist.

II like this bit from the BBC website “On the matter of a photograph of the prince with his arm around Ms Giuffre, with Maxwell in the background, his lawyers say they do not have enough information to admit or deny its existence.”

Um guys, scroll up a bit and the photo is there. So yes, it does exist.

That’s not actually what the lawyers wrote though!

What they actually said:

38. The below photograph depicts Prince Andrew, Plaintiff, and Maxwell at Maxwell’s home prior to Prince Andrew sexually abusing Plaintiff.

Prince Andrew lacks sufficient information to admit or deny the allegations contained in paragraph thirty-eight of the Complaint.

It could be that Prince Andrew is unable to confirm that the photograph was taken at Maxwell’s home, or perhaps that the premises was even Maxwell’s home. More likely he can’t recall if it was taken before or after abusing her 😉

https://news.sky.com/story/prince-andrew-and-virginia-giuffre-settle-out-of-court-over-civil-sex-assault-claim-12542826

Its all over?

Settled?

Original photo lost?

What is the latest news, have we forgiven him and realised she was just trying grab some $$$?

Bugger…fun over!

Thanks BillMC. I wonder if we will ever see the numbers involved.

I was looking forward to seeing him in court, desperately trying to wriggle his way out of it.

He avoids court

She gets compensation

His reputation is trashed.

Everyone sorted?

“Prince Andrew intends to make a substantial donation to Ms Giuffre’s charity in support of victims’ rights.

How thoughtful

I was looking forward to seeing him in court, desperately trying not to sweat to wriggle his way out of it.

Everyone sorted?

I suspect not.

He was always going to do this – there was no way his legal team were going to let it get to court.. Based on previous performances he’d get torn apart if cross examined.

I really wanted to see him sweating in the witness box but realistically he was never going to go to court.

Would it be noncencical to think we’ll be paying for this?

Can we still have a revolution?

His legal team probably said to her how many £million will it cost to make this go away…

Wonder if you’d be able review donations to her charity accounts if it gets a massive boost?

The duke also pledged to “demonstrate his regret for his association” with the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein by supporting the “fight against the evils of sex trafficking, and by supporting its victims”.

He also commended the “bravery of Ms Giuffre and other survivors in standing up for themselves and others”.

What an utterly cowardly little shitty slimeball he is. We can only be thankful that all those close to him will know just exactly what he is – and it extends to well beyond just being an utterly cowardly little shitty slimeball.

Hmm, I wonder if the bank of mum (ie: us) made this possible in exchange for his titles etc last month?