Virginia Guiffre and Andrew settle out of court

[Suzanne999]

From Metro
Prince Andrew and Virginia Giuffre have reached a ‘settlement in principle’ in the civil sex claim filed in the US, court documents show

Does this show his guilt? Water down in some way his actions? I’m sure some will say this proves she was only in it for the money. I think she and a lot of underage girls were abused but because of the wealth involved those guilty will never face justice. Can’t understand why I feel sad about this outcome.

I think it was inevitable. Either could have adduced evidence that would have been destructive to the other. Guiffre allegedly assisted in grooming others - doesn't mean she isn't a victim of course, as she was vulnerable when recruited and groomed herself. At worst, the evidence might have caused prosecutors to think again about taking a case against them.

The statement is probably a win for Guiffre - it goes as far as it can really without an admission of guilt (which could lead to criminal proceedings - no way would Prince Andrew's lawyers agree to that if they were doing their job).

@Lockdownbear

Can someone on here answer my question? *Just saw on the news the dirty bastard is still denying any involvement with VG!!! So why did he pay up 🤷‍♀️ is he now admitting his guilt*

That makes no sense, I assumed he would pay up and shut up hoping the whole thing would go away.

I am curious about it being framed as a Charity Donation, can you not claim tax relief on donations?

It's not all a charity donation, there's a payment to her as well, and her legal fees covered. You do get tax relief on charity donations but only against income tax (I think) and I doubt he pays that.

Of course he's going to continue to deny it.

@Lockdownbear
I don't understand why he decided to pay up. Is it because he is Guilty and paying her off but will never admit it.

Why would an innocent person pay up 😉( not that he is)

@Duntelchaig

Oh let’s not start on his daughters. Blame the women again.

You're right. I have heard that Sarah Ferguson was involved with Epstein, although how much, I don't know. I did see her on a couple of chat shows extolling Andrew's virtue. There's no evidence to implicate the daughters, and we don't really know their thoughts on him. It does seem easy to blame the women around him, though.

@ParkheadParadise

Can someone on here answer my question? Just saw on the news the dirty bastard is still denying any involvement with VG!!! So why did he pay up 🤷‍♀️ is he now admitting his guilt. Next thing we know he will be out with his Mammy celebrating her jubilee.

Because he shift himself in the foot with the Matlis interview.

VG's photo proved she had met him and there's an email where Maxwell says she believes the picture to be genuine.

So PA saying he has no recollection of her simply doesn't wash.

Equally his pizza express, always wearing a tie and not sweating defence cannot he proven.

If it went to court VG's lawyers would have had a field day cross examining him and likely found him to be a liar - especially in light of pictures at that show him sweating and without a tie in London at that time.

If he'd have kept his mouth shut it might have been different, but he handed several smoking guns to VG's legal team by providing utterly ridiculous alibi's and unless he said he'd lied to Matlis he couldn't revisit his stance on this.

He'd have made a fool of himself in court and dragged it out for months and still likely lost.

@Maireas

No I don't. Diana was elevated to quasi sainthood and the royals suffered a backlash. Don't get personal, though. No need.

@Maireas - very true but she was also brought in as a brood mare to give Charles kids...

Nowhere have I got personal to you. Must be your comprehension skills.

[quote ParkheadParadise]**@Lockdownbear
I don't understand why he decided to pay up. Is it because he is Guilty and paying her off but will never admit it.

Why would an innocent person pay up 😉( not that he is)[/quote]
That question has been addressed several times on this thread.

@Gonnagetgoing -ok, I think the Diana murder conspiracy theories are best left now. Maybe start a thread if you're interested. Let's not derail this one.
Always fasten your seatbelt though.

@motherofthelittlescreamingone

I think it was inevitable. Either could have adduced evidence that would have been destructive to the other. Guiffre allegedly assisted in grooming others - doesn't mean she isn't a victim of course, as she was vulnerable when recruited and groomed herself. At worst, the evidence might have caused prosecutors to think again about taking a case against them.

The statement is probably a win for Guiffre - it goes as far as it can really without an admission of guilt (which could lead to criminal proceedings - no way would Prince Andrew's lawyers agree to that if they were doing their job).

Nobody would prosecute someone for being groomed. You do not understand grooming. This is normal behaviour. The girls in Rotherham brought other girls along. Wayne John Darcy the serial killer had teenage boys bring other boys to him. Nobody would prosecute because we have moved on from medieval laws and the law now recognises grooming.

Thanks @BreadInCaptivity
That's a shame it's not going to court it would have made fantastic viewing 😉

@BreadInCaptivity I agree. A trial would have been a disaster for Andrew and he would clearly have been proven a serial liar.

[quote Monopolyiscrap]@BreadInCaptivity I agree. A trial would have been a disaster for Andrew and he would clearly have been proven a serial liar.[/quote]
In a sense, that Maitliss interview helped.
He thought it had gone well, then saw the reaction. Otherwise he may have pushed to have a day in court, his arrogance and entitlement leading him to believe it would be a good outcome.
(As he believed the Maitliss interview had)

Just to add, if he had not have done Matlis the reason it would be different is that it would have been quite hard for VG's team to prove he did sleep with her.

The photo just proves they had met.

The difference post Matlis was they didn't have to prove this anymore really.

All they had to prove was his alibis were a load of tosh and thus if he was lying about those ergo he can't be trusted to tell the truth about the nature of his relationship with VG.

He absolutely buggered his position on this all by himself because he arrogantly assumed everyone would believe what he said and that would be the end of it.

It never entered his head that he might have to prove what he said and fundamentally he couldn't.

God, can you imagine him on the stand being cross examined by a Rottweiler US lawyer? 😳

Popcorn sales would have been through the roof

The viewing figures would have been enormous if they had screened it.

The Maitlis interview really was an incredible own goal- and totally unnecessary.

It's surely going to go down in history as one of the greatest ever unforced fuck-ups, like Gerald Ratner's destruction of his jewellery business

@girlmom21 sorry! I c&p the wrong bit - meant to reply to the original message

[quote AdamRyan]@girlmom21 sorry! I c&p the wrong bit - meant to reply to the original message[/quote]
Ah no problem

The Maitlis interview was a masterclass in interview technique. She slid the blade into his ribs so stealthily he didn’t even realise it was happening. He so underestimated her.

@ABitBesottedWithMyDog

The Maitlis interview really was an incredible own goal- and totally unnecessary.

It's surely going to go down in history as one of the greatest ever unforced fuck-ups, like Gerald Ratner's destruction of his jewellery business

I love the part of the Newsnight interview where EM asks him: 'knowing what you know now, do you regret your friendship with Epstein?'

Andrew: massive pause...............deep thinking expression.......'I've got a clever answer here' facial expression...........'No'.

The man is a total numpty.

@ABitBesottedWithMyDog

The Maitlis interview really was an incredible own goal- and totally unnecessary.

It's surely going to go down in history as one of the greatest ever unforced fuck-ups, like Gerald Ratner's destruction of his jewellery business

An excellent parallel yes.

Maybe doing a Ratner might be superseded by doing a "Randy".....

@Blossomtoes

The Maitlis interview was a masterclass in interview technique. She slid the blade into his ribs so stealthily he didn’t even realise it was happening. He so underestimated her.

Indeed. She quietly gave him enough rope and he hung himself. She also gave him ample opportunity to express his regret and sympathy for the trafficking victims, including a big, fat get-out-of-jail free card at the end. When he didn't take even that chance I cringed.

FAR more effective than Paxman-style browbeating them over the head and cutting them off mid-every-sentence so no one can follow what's being said.

Windsor convicted himself, out of his own mouth, on National TV. It wasn't trial by media other than they provided him with the platform through which to do it. He did it, all by himself, voluntarily.

And thought that the interview had been a resounding success.

He wanted to do a second interview.

@Blossomtoes

The Maitlis interview was a masterclass in interview technique. She slid the blade into his ribs so stealthily he didn’t even realise it was happening. He so underestimated her.

Yip, and I bet his lawyers knew nothing about it. They were probably sitting screaming at the telly Shut-up!!!

VG got a payout from Epstein and part of that was no more claims from anyone else. Although it was too loosely worded for it to cover Andrews back.

Do you think anyone else has chipped in and a more water tight "no more claims" agreement signed.

I'd really have like to have seen her go after some of the big American names.

@Lockdownbear Her side said the no more lawsuits were never meant to cover absolutely anyone in the world. That would have been ridiculous. It was meant to stop Epstein from being sued again for a different allegation.