The Duke of York's lawyers appeared in a New York court via video link to have accuser Virginia Giuffre’s civil case dismissed - a decis...
The Duke of York's lawyers appeared in a New York court via video link to have accuser Virginia Giuffre’s civil case dismissed - a decision to which a judge said he would rule on “pretty soon”.
A judge has told Prince Andrew he “must assume the truth” the Duke of York forced “a child to have sexual intercourse” with him, at this stage in proceedings against him.
The royal is trying to have a civil rape case in the US thrown out before it can go to trial, following serious claims by his accuser Virginia Giuffre.
She is suing Andrew for allegedly sexually assaulting her when she was a teenager, seeking unspecified damages that could run into millions of dollars.
Attorneys for the embattled Prince today appeared in a New York court via video link to have Ms Giuffre’s civil case dismissed.
A judge said he would rule on whether the case can proceed “pretty soon” but it would be up to a jury to determine the truth of the allegations if it goes trial.
Ms Giuffre claims she was trafficked by billionaire sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and convicted paedophile Ghislaine Maxwell in 2001 to have sex with Andrew when she was aged 17 and a minor under US law.
Epstein was sentenced to 18 months in prison in 2008 for soliciting and procuring a person under age 18 for prostitution but faced new charges in 2019 before his death.
Maxwell was found guilty of child sex trafficking charges in December following trial and faces up to 65 years in prison.
The Duke, 61, has vehemently denied all the allegations against him.
Andrew’s legal team asserted her new lawsuit had no merit, arguing a £370,000 settlement his accuser made in a separate case with Epstein in 2009 now protects him from being sued.
During a terse moment, the Duke’s lawyer Andrew Brettler attacked Giuffre for not explicitly explaining her allegations against the prince.
Andrew’s legal team argued as she has not given exacting details of her claims against the Duke, she needed “to lock herself into a story”.
They said the Prince needed to know the details of which he needs to defend himself against.
Mr Brettler told the New York court: “Miss Giuffre needs to lock herself into a story. Now, not sometime in the future after she conducts discovery and figures out where the chips may fall, she needs to allege today.
"She needs to allege in her complaint against Prince Andrew when he supposedly abused her. I'd like even a, a date a month, we would settle for a year. I mean, right now, all we have is that she was supposedly 17 years old.
“It could standover, I guess, two calendar years. We don't even have a date, a time, a location other than an apartment. We don't know when this was. And Miss Giuffre doesn't articulate what supposedly happened to her at the hands of Prince Andrew.
“She alleged in a group pleading fashion that Epstein, Maxwell and Prince Andrew abused her in conclusory fashion.
“She doesn't explain what this alleged abuse was.
“She was over the age of consent in New York. So she has to allege that she was forcibly compelled in unwanted sexual contact.
“She does not allege that. We do not know the details of this allegation and it's time that we do before Prince Andrew should be required to answer these very serious allegations.
“He should be told what the allegations are specifically.”
Judge Lewis Kaplan immediately snapped back.
“With all due respect, Mr Brettler, that’s not a dog that's going to hunt here.
“I am obliged to accept as true on this motion (Giuffre's initial lawsuit), the well-pleaded, factual allegations the complaint paragraph 37 'on one occasion, Prince Andrew, sexually abused plaintiff in London at Maxwell's home during this encounter Epstein, Maxwell and Prince Andrew forced plaintiff, a child to have sexual intercourse with Prince Andrew against her.’
“That, I must assume the truth of that allegation.”
If the case comes to court, it will be up to a jury to decide if her allegations are true on "the preponderance of the evidence" not beyond reasonable doubt as in a criminal trial.
Judge Kaplan made the point that at this stage of the preceding he "must assume" her allegations to be true.
During the exchange, the justice appeared to take a swipe at former President Donald Trump when discussing the specificity of Ms Giuffre’s allegations.
Noting the line “During this encounter, Epstein, Maxwell, and Prince Andrew forced Plaintiff, a child, to have sexual intercourse with Prince Andrew against her will” he said there isn’t any doubt over the meaning of “non-consensual sexual intercourse”, before adding: “Not since someone else was in the White House.”
Much of the hearing centred upon the 2009 settlement Ms Giuffre signed with Epstein in which she agreed to “release, acquit, satisfy, and forever discharge” the billionaire and “any other person or entity who could have been included as a potential defendant” in legal action brought by her.
Andrew’s legal team and Judge Kaplan grappled over the word “potential” in the 12-page settlement with Jeffrey Epstein.
Mr Brettler argued the Duke is covered under the phrase “potential defendant” because Ms Giuffre alleged he was aware she was a victim of sex trafficking and furthered abuse against her.
Judge Kaplan, however, questioned whether the Duke counts as a “potential defendant” because she had accused him of abuse before the settlement was signed, meaning the word “potential” wouldn’t apply to him.
Mr Brettler said of the settlement: "I don't know who would be included in other potential defendants - if it weren't all of the other people who... Giuffre alleged abused her.
"She could have sued them and she did not and therefore she waived her rights to sue them when she entered into the 2009 release agreement and accepted the money from Mr Epstein.
"She did not return that money when she decided to file this lawsuit."
Ms Giuffre’s lawyer David Boies argued: “The only claim that is asserted that was made in Florida in the 2009 action that covered Prince Andrew was the third count which was to transport somebody for the purpose of illegal sexual activity.
“There is no allegation that Prince Andrew was the person transporting.
"There is no allegation that Prince Andrew fell into the category of people who were doing the trafficking.
“He was somebody to whom the girls were trafficked.”
At one point Judge Kaplan appeared to hand Ms Giuffre’s lawyers a crucial argument that could bar Andrew from using the settlement to secure a dismissal.
Addressing Mr Boies, the judge asked about language in the settlement that says it is not to be used “by any other person in any other case”.
Because the Duke was not a party to the settlement, Judge Kaplan suggested he counts as “any other person”.
Under argument, to which Mr Boies agreed, the royal would not be allowed to use the settlement to claim protection from Ms Giuffre’s suit.
Today’s hearing went on for about an hour before Judge Kaplan told both parties: “You’ll have a decision pretty soon.”
He declined to provide a more specific timeline but said he expects both sides to continue with the set discovery schedule in the meantime.
Andrew has not been charged criminally, and no criminal charges could result from Ms Giuffre's lawsuit since it is a civil case.
The Duke repeatedly declined requests by federal prosecutors in the States for an interview about their probe into Epstein's sex trafficking, former US Attorney for the Southern District of New York Geoffrey Berman said in June 2020.
A spokesman for the US Attorney's office declined to comment if they had approached the Prince recently.
Ms Giuffre has used New York's Child Victims Act (CVA) that allowed those abused to sue their alleged attackers.
In 2019, New York lawmakers introduced a "look-back window" in the Child Victims Act that raised the deadline to 55 years of age, giving victims of decades-old abuse two years to file civil claims by August 14, 2021.
The deadline for claims was later extended due to Covid by then New York Governor Andrew Cuomo.
Andrew’s lawyer questioned whether the extension was constitutional and Cuomo had the power to order such a move.
Mum-of-three Ms Giuffre filed the lawsuit on August 9, just five days before the window closed.
In her lawsuit, she says of the royal: "Prince Andrew's actions constitute sexual offences as defined in New York Penal Law Article 130, including but not limited to sexual misconduct as defined in Article 130.20, rape in the third degree as defined in Article 130.25, rape in the first degree as defined in Article 130.35."
The Duke has "absolutely and categorically" denied her allegations.
The civil lawsuit hearing for Prince Andrew comes just a week after his friend Maxwell was convicted of sex offences following a separate criminal trial and awaits sentencing in the US.
Mssiuffre's lawyer Sigrid McCawley said: "At the sentencing [for Maxwell], I anticipate that there will be a lot of testimony from many, many other women who were not able to be heard at the trial, who will come forward and bring information about their suffering at the hands of Ghislaine Maxwell.
"I believe this will be considered by the court before Judge Nathan renders her decision on the length of time Ghislaine will serve behind bars."
Epstein committed suicide in August 2019 while in jail.
He was arrested a month earlier and charged with child sex offences.
Yesterday, Ms Giuffre’s father said the royal should go to prison.
Sky Roberts said the Duke of York must be held accountable for his alleged crimes against his daughter.
“I would like to see him go to prison for at least a little while,” Mr Roberts told ITV ’s Good Morning Britain on Monday.
“He needs to know what it’s like to be held accountable for his actions. This is not the times of William Wallace when royals can just do whatever they want.”
No comments