Oh Prince Andrew is getting SUED by Virginia Robert's

[LaurieFairyCake]

That will be interesting

He says he didn't, she says he did. So one of them is lying. How are they going to prove which one, there's presumably no physical evidence?

@StapMe

He says he didn't, she says he did. So one of them is lying. How are they going to prove which one, there's presumably no physical evidence?

It's a civil case isn't it? The evidence needed in a civil case is less than that required for a criminal case. That doesn't make it wrong though.

My relative's case didn't get beyond the CPS, but the man still did what he was accused of. I believe her 100%.

Look at O J Simpson. Found not quilty in a criminal case, but guilty in a civil one. I think most rational people would agree that he was an guilty as hell.

How are they going to prove which one, there's presumably no physical evidence?

Indeed, there's absolutely nothing to go on. Zilch. It's as though she appeared out of nowhere. And given Andrew has already told us the picture of him with Virginia Roberts and Ghislaine Maxwell in the background was doctored, and he apparently doesn't sweat, and he even remembers the night in question he was actually at Pizza Express in woking; indeed he even flew all the way to New York in order to end his friendship with Epstein who just happens to be a convicted sex offender.

I'm with you @StapMe all these unfortunate coincidences just make it so difficult to tell.

Beenthroughmorerthanalittlebit
'Personally, I think the closest we can get to the truth is by knowing the people involved and going by their actions.'

... you seem to be saying we should look at all the contextual evidence of how people have behaved in other situations.

Taking that to its logical conclusion, you end up with the terrible attitude of the past when, eg: a victim of sexual assault is judged by how they dress, or how many previous sexual partners they've had.

@Blossomtoes

She can't settle out of court because then she'll be undermining her own credibility

I disagree. An out of court settlement would be an admission of guilt on his part.

I don't think so because she's saying she's only doing it to hold him to account. If she takes money, it'll look like what all her detractors have accused her of, that she's lying and just doing it for the money. Remember when the families sued Michael Jackson and they took the money? Their credibility was shot.

I mean, people who support VRG will take it as a win, I understand that, but her reputation will suffer for it.

We’re not going to agree on this one @Martianworld. Nobody who’s innocent makes an out of court settlement that costs them ££££££.

VladimirsPoutine - yes I know Andrews tales in the car crash interview did stretch credibility, and showed what a pompous oaf he is, but is he a rapist and how can it be proven either way?

@knittingaddict

Look at O J Simpson. Found not quilty in a criminal case, but guilty in a civil one. I think most rational people would agree that he was an guilty as hell.

I think there were only 12 people who thought OJ wasn't guilty. Lol. But seriously that was held against a background of racial tension in Califirnia so I think it was more of a fuck you to the judicial system.

This is being held against the “me-too” background which is why it's suddenly got such traction after its been knocking around for so long. And could be to PA's detriment that people,are feeling more inclined to believe women over men. However, although civil cases are on the balance of probabilities, the onus is still on the accuser to prove it.

@Blossomtoes

We’re not going to agree on this one *@Martianworld*. Nobody who’s innocent makes an out of court settlement that costs them ££££££.

From PAs point of view he can't win. Even if he won the court case, the sight of the son of the Queen of Britain talking about his sex life in intimate detail, and VRGs solicitors will humilate him as much as possible, would be beyond embarrassing and something the RF could not countenance. They'd spin any settlement as saving face for the Queen.

Everyone with tons of money and can afford it, weighs up what damages their reputation more, being humiliated on the stand and having other secrets potentially revealed, or paying up fir the case to be dropped. Do you remember when a case was dropped against Paul Burrell when he took some of Diana's clothes? The Queen will have weighed up what could be said in court against the worth of winning the case. Doesn't mean PB had a right to the clothes.

This article is explaining more about what could happen to PA and the potential knock on effect from GM's trial in November

m.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/prince-andrew-lawsuit-why-virginia-giuffre-is-suing-the-duke-of-york_uk_61125d52e4b001428557c56f

How are they going to prove which one, there's presumably no physical evidence?

There SHOULD be evidence though, there should be a log of who his security officer(s) were and where they went with him. If this is missing it is suspicious.

If he did take his daughter to a party then surely the girl whose party it was, or her parents, should be able to tell what time the the party was.

Ghislaine maxwell will be looking to do a deal, she is facing decades in prison, who knows what she will say at trial and what else may come out.

I don't think so because she's saying she's only doing it to hold him to account. If she takes money, it'll look like what all her detractors have accused her of, that she's lying and just doing it for the money. Remember when the families sued Michael Jackson and they took the money? Their credibility was shot.

Was it Martianworld? I don't feel that way and I think it was their only way to get some kind of recognition and justice. I might have done the same thing in their shoes. The families knew that O J wasn't the wealthy man he had been and that they would receive only a token amount. They got about $500,000 out of a settlement of $33.5m. What really mattered was the guilty verdict.

I also think the statute of limitations on some crimes in the US are criminal in themselves. In some states in previous decades the S of L for rape was as low as a year. Some of the victims of the Golden State killer will never see justice despite him being found and convicted of some of his other crimes. In Florida the S of L is 4 years and in Minnesota 3 years. How can women get justice with those laws in place?

Sorry Martianworld. I thought you were talking about O J Simpson. I'm sure someone was earlier.

[quote DuncinToffee]This article is explaining more about what could happen to PA and the potential knock on effect from GM's trial in November

m.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/prince-andrew-lawsuit-why-virginia-giuffre-is-suing-the-duke-of-york_uk_61125d52e4b001428557c56f[/quote]
That's interesting. Thank you. I wonder why most of these don't make it to court? Does a judge have to ok it to proceed or something?

I can't think there's anything that she hasn't already said, or any accusation she hasn't already made, so I'm not sure there would be anything to be gained by PA giving evidence really. He would just open himself to more humiliation and it's not as if he has any charisma to win anyone over.

Thank you. I wonder why most of these don't make it to court?

I wonder that too.

The fact that it does should really put a stop to 'gold digger' comments but I doubt it will.

I can't see a problem with a financial settlement though, it doesn't somehow imply that she's only after money. Trauma can completely destabilise someone to the point they can't work or function in society but bills don't actually give a damn about your mental health.

@knittingaddict

Sorry Martianworld. I thought you were talking about O J Simpson. I'm sure someone was earlier.

Sorry that was my fault. I did respond to someone about OJ - that there were only 12 people who thought he was innocent! I agree that Nicole Brown's family were only interested in the guilty verdict. I think if they'd chased money over a verdict, their reputation would have been tarnished. I think the same is true for Virginia Guiffre.

As for the time of statute of limitations, I dont know enough to comment. But regarding this case, Virginia Giuffre is 38 and has been giving interviews about this matter for 15 - 20 years. It's not like she was uncertain about coming forward. The Child Victims Act gave her the opportunity of a year to sue from August 2019 to Aug 2020, and then extended to August 2021. She will definitely have had consultations with FBI lawyers as to what to do to pressurise PA. So she's had plenty of time to go to court over the past 2 years but has chosen not to.

Even if concrete evidence of where Andrew was and with whom on certain dates surfaces via the protection officers (odd that it hasn't surfaced yet, isn't it? ) and even if it can be proved that he had opportunity to molest Ms Guiffre (by being alone in a room with her or something) that still doesn't prove that he actually did it. Without physical evidence, it's all " he said, she said". But he has dented his own credibility with that interview. And the twit told his mother that it went well.......
On balance, from that interview, I think he's so arrogant that he genuinely doesn't remember her, whether or not they got up to anything, and I'll bet Epstein used him as bait too...."Do you want to meet a real live prince?" And I think she was rather more worldly wise than she lets on.

@Martianworld

If she has such a solid case,against him, why didn't she sue when she was doing interviews in News of the World? Why is she sueing now when SoL is almost up. That sounds a bit like the last throw of the dice.

If he has knowingly broken the law, I hope she wins. If he hasn't, I hope he wins. Can British citizens even be extradited to the US for civil cases? Can civil cases be heard in absentia?

@Martianworld Perhaps because Ghislaine has now been apprehended and further forensic evidence seized? Plus VR has attempted criminal proceedings against PA and been thwarted, at the time she gave those interviews I'm sure she was more hopeful of a criminal investigation rather than a Royal family cover up.

Worth noting that she also successfully sued Ghislaine in 2015 - by your reckoning that undermines any criminal allegations. Interesting that the US court system doesn't agree with you.

Why are you insinuating that it matters when she decided to sue? What is your point?

Also remarkable that you say she was doing interviews with NOTW in 2019 since it's not been in publication since 2011.

You may want to review your 'facts'

Abuse and trauma can't be undone, but money helps in all sorts of practical ways. I can't see why a victim should not seek financial compensation from their abuser if they are able to.

And I think she was rather more worldly wise than she lets on.

Therefore what?

You'd really think this website is one of very few places where discourse on rape & abuse wouldn't be treated with the typical 'well was she wearing a short skirt and red lipstick' lens but alas...

@StapMe

Even if concrete evidence of where Andrew was and with whom on certain dates surfaces via the protection officers (odd that it hasn't surfaced yet, isn't it? ) and even if it can be proved that he had opportunity to molest Ms Guiffre (by being alone in a room with her or something) that still doesn't prove that he actually did it. Without physical evidence, it's all " he said, she said". But he has dented his own credibility with that interview. And the twit told his mother that it went well....... On balance, from that interview, I think he's so arrogant that he genuinely doesn't remember her, whether or not they got up to anything, and I'll bet Epstein used him as bait too...."Do you want to meet a real live prince?" And I think she was rather more worldly wise than she lets on.

What do you actually mean by physical evidence? The photograph is physical evidence, as are call logs, travel itineraries and financial transactions. There's plenty of physical evidence.

If you mean DNA then no there isn't but if the physical evidence contradicts PA's alibi if being at a pizzeria in Woking, and instead places him in the company of a known paedophile with a trafficked girl who can give a detailed physical description of him without clothing, then that is a pretty compelling case.

@SionnachRua

I hope Charles hangs him out to dry when the Queen is gone. And in the meantime, VR's lawyers have fun cranking up the pressure on him. They might not have jurisdiction over him but by God, he wouldn't like the headlines that could come out of this.

Yeah like Charles is thoroughly decent having friends such as Jimmy Savile

And I think she was rather more worldly wise than she lets on.

Also please do explain @StapMe how the 'worldly wise' 17 year old trafficking survivor constructed this situation to entrap a consortium of well educated and powerful businesses men who just happened to have a penchant for sex with underage girls, as that is what you seen to be implying...?

@Duckypoohs

It just all gets made into a joke, hurdehur Prince Andrew can't sweat. Laugh and move on, nobody seems to see the murky depths of this shit. Yay the royal family are involved in sex trafficking, nevermind Kate has ditched the skinnies bleugh.

This