The thing is Giuffre has also accused the owner of Hilton hotels (whose name she forgets, although she called him ‘Dick’ which is the correct first name)), a U.S senator (George Mitchell) and a Nobel prize winning scientist, alongside Prince Andrew and Dershowitz.
Of course, the whole story is remarkable and it could be true. On the other hand, it is traditional to have to prove allegations. We know where the Met got to with ‘it is highly credible and true’ without actually testing the evidence.
Like you I am curious as to where the civil cases go, but I apply the same standards to Giuffre as to Dershowitz.
Giuffre was, certainly, a victim. What her status is now, however, is more in question. She is no longer a child, knows the value of her claims, and has access to top US lawyers.
Being a victim does not buy you infinite credibility, especially after admitting ‘misremembering’ facts several times. Who would remember themselves being 15 when they were actually 17? Don’t you remember how old you were when you got your first job or had important first experiences (good or bad)?
Why has PA not been charged with a criminal offence in the US? I don’t believe the royal family has any influence or power to stop this.
I am very open minded about the whole PA thing. He is certainly scuzzy, but was that really a surprise to anyone? Whether he is a criminal, however, is a matter for the courts and I am quaintly old fashioned in that I actually believe that we should consider someone innocent until proved guilty in a court of law.