Prince Andrew 'fails to cooperate' with FBI

[CathyorClaire]

www.thesun.co.uk/news/10832298/prince-andrew-provides-zero-cooperation-after-fbi-ask-to-interview-him-over-epstein-links/

No surprise there, then.

Do we think he'll hold out for the threatened subpoena or will the renewed public spotlight mean he jumps before he's pushed?

@Puzzledandpissedoff

He is an adult who can take legal advice & act on ot/ignore it as he wishes

Absolutely true, though in a case like this I'd be surprised if they weren't the RF's solicitors - who may well be mindful of agendas other than those of pure law

Basically what I'm saying is that absolutely nothing to do with the RF is necessarily as it appears; it's the ultimate game of smoke and mirrors, though of some passing entertainment in its way

True yes hadn't thought of that.

Even if the others don't like him, they may feel that protectng him legally might be worthwhile.

Well, as you say, a lot isn't as it seems & for the most part when out in public they are playing a part.

I think a lot of us can be tolerant & cheery at work knowing it pays the wages/keeps one in luxury!

,

I read (Daily Express online) he is too be chucked out of the royal lodge. Good move I think. Thirty bedrooms. So fifteen each for him and Fergie.

@Viviennemary

I read (Daily Express online) he is too be chucked out of the royal lodge. Good move I think. Thirty bedrooms. So fifteen each for him and Fergie.

I thought that he had a secure rental for 70+ yrs.

I read (Daily Express online) he is too be chucked out of the royal lodge

I read in the DM that Wills is eyeing Royal Lodge up so there could be something in that.

If it transpires that Wills does up sticks and move there I do hope he too is expected to refund the taxpayer funded refurb costs on his Kensington Palace apartment.

And PA refunds the £7million spent on refurbishment of Royal Lodge?

Just to clarify this, but the lawsuit against him is not in the UK, where he lives. He couldn’t ignore that, no.

This lawsuit has however been filed in the state of New York, where Prince Andrew does not live (and where he will assuredly not be visiting anytime soon ). As this is a civil matter, not a criminal case, and he cannot therefore be extradited to respond to it, he actually can do nothing - it’s called refusing to submit to the US Court’s jurisdiction. It’s also a perfectly appropriate step to take when a claimant tries to force you into a jurisdiction of their choice. Normally, a case should be filed where the defendant lives, or where the relevant acts took place. Filing somewhere else can be considered to be “forum shopping” and defendants are protected against it.

@Serenster very interesting thank you.

Of course Andrew can ignore legal advice if he wishes, but I don't see how it would benefit him to do so. Most cases like this ultimately come down to one person's word against another's. No matter what he says, those who think he's lying will still believe he's lying. And maybe they'll be right. Too many people believe that for a public rehabilitation to be possible. And a complete factual vindication is unlikely, even if he's truly innocent. Even if it can be proven that Giuffre got some details wrong, like the date or him sweating, that's not unusual for sexual assault victims describing an incident many years ago, and most of her supporters wouldn't regard it as conclusive proof that she was lying about the main points.

Does anyone know how much money Andrew has outright, not subject to the Queen's control? The Queen may choose to give him money to settle it, but she can't settle it for him without his agreement.

If he ignores this, it will be decided in absentia...a far worse outcome - unlimited damages and guilt shown

Yes, a complete vindication is now unlikely. He should've addressed this years ago

I'm not sure it really is a worse outcome. If he did it, there's a good chance he'd lose despite attempting to defend himself. Even if he didn't do it, there's a decent chance of that outcome in a civil suit. I don't know if he has any assets in the US, but if he does, I imagine they aren't anything he can't afford to lose. Even if he gets hit with a gazillion-dollar verdict, it will be difficult - maybe impossible - for Giuffre's lawyers to enforce that against any assets not in the US. If he can't be made to pay it anyway, then its existence is largely irrelevant from a practical standpoint, plus he's avoided giving the FBI anything they could potentially use against him in a criminal proceeding.

He might decide to sue Virginia Giuffre in return, as did that legal man in America who categorically and loudly denies an association with her.

The three options open to Andrew are to settle the case before it comes to court, defend himself against the allegations or try to avoid service of the lawsuit against him on account of being in a foreign country.

The third option is unlikely.

If he declines to present a defence, the case will be decided 'in absentia' . A lot of his opportunities evaporated when he did that interview, because of the denials... now not easy to negotiate a settlement with someone you have no recollection of meeting. His years of ignoring this have come to an end.

If the DM is to be believed , Charles and William are increasingly concerned by A’s continued silence .
There will definitely be no way back for A if they have their way . Apparently they were furious that he agreed to be interviewed on TV following PP’s death .

@Rousette he doesn’t need to “avoid service of the lawsuit” as he is demonstrably not in the New York State jurisdiction and therefore can’t be validly served with the claim. He or his lawyers will doubtless have been sent a copy as a courtesy, but that cannot count as service to mean you are subject to the court’s jurisdiction, as it does not operate extraterritorially.

There is a difference between not submitting to the jurisdiction and not presenting a defence. In the first case you are essentially saying that “the court the claimant has chosen is the wrong court to hear this claim, and it has no jurisdiction over me”. You then take no steps at all in the process. This also means Andrew can argue an abuse of process by the claimant, not least because normally a defendant will not have concurrent criminal and civil exposure against them as the risk of personal prejudice is so high. There is a very high chance if Andrew were to take any steps in the NY lawsuit that meant he actually went to NY he’d instantly be arrested by the FBI, because why wouldn’t they, if he lands in their lap like that? It’s far harder for them to make up a case for an extradition or even compel an interview, which they notably haven’t done yet.

Obviously it’s a decision for the Prince and his advisers to take, but I’d be telling him to decline to submit to the NY court’s jurisdiction, tell Ms Guiffre that if she thought she could prove her case, come and do so in a UK court, which is the proper forum for this, and no further comment other than to deny her allegations. Any default judgment in the US can then be dismissed as an abuse of process in an unfair proceeding which hasn’t heard from the defendant, and any monetary award won’t be enforceable against him in the UK in any event. From his perspective, I don’t think that’s a terrible outcome?

Of course he will decline to submit anything. It's what he's been doing for years. Ignore ignore ignore.

From his perspective, I don’t think that’s a terrible outcome?
For him, no.
Maybe different for any victim of his if he did take advantage of them.

If he ignores again, it isn't going to go away is it? He can't put a lid on it. It will drag on and on, and probably that's what the likes of Charles and William dread.

I don’t get why they’d file it in New York when that’s not where the assaults allegedly happened.

@Gilmorehill

I don’t get why they’d file it in New York when that’s not where the assaults allegedly happened.

It’s to take advantage of her ability under the New York State Child Victims Act to sue for something that happened (in this case) 20 years or so ago. Normally you would not be able to bring a civil case after such a long period of time. Criminal cases are different - there is no time limit on the State’s power to prosecute someone.

Of course, just because she can bring a case in New York under that Act does not mean that the New York court is the right court to hear such a claim.

@Roussette

And PA refunds the £7million spent on refurbishment of Royal Lodge?

Apparently he paid for that himself which in turn opened the way for him to buy the the seventy five year lease for £1m.

The equivalent of £250 a week...

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/this-britain/30-room-mansion-grounds-windsor-castle-you-sir-acirc-pound-250-week-490763.html

@Serenster thanks.

@Rousette to be honest a tactic of “ignore ignore ignore” seems perfectly reasonable to me. Accusations have been made against him publicly, he has responded publicly. There is an ongoing criminal investigation in the US that has so far taken nor formal steps to compel him to do anything, and which has stated he is a “person of interest” and not a suspect.

Even from a starting point of believing Ms Guiffre’s account (which I do) I will also accord Prince Andrew the respect of him genuinely believing that his actions are not criminal. Sleazy and poorly-judged, absolutely (but then he totally came across as a sleaze with poor judgment even before this issue became public…). And if he genuinely believes he’s not broken the law here, waiting to see if anything does actually come of the formal processes seems entirely reasonable.

(In any other context I can think of, where we were considering any other person who had not already been tried and found wanting in the court of public opinion, waiting to see if this actually amounts to a criminal case would not be controversial, surely? It’s what any of us would do if accused of something we believed unfounded, surely?).

I don't know if he has any assets in the US, but if he does, I imagine they aren't anything he can't afford to lose

TBH I'm not convinced there's anything left which he can't afford to lose

His good name? Except to mummy that went long ago
Money? Not while mummy lives, nor even after if he has dirt on the rest of them
Sarah? Due to money I doubt she's going anywhere, and she's getting a bit old to pull another millionaire

As long as his health holds out he'll probably just carry on along his oafish way - after all what's anyone going to actually DO about it?

Serenster I don't think he can ignore much longer. I am sure he is getting the best advice from the best lawyers, and if he does ignore and it comes to nothing, there is no rehabiliation for him with the British public.
His choice then.

I agree Puzzled. All over the press it sounds like Charles, William and even his Mother are distancing themselves. Charles and William are pissed off because it's tarnishing the Monarchy, the Queen does what she's good at... just distancing herself (not a criticism, but it's how it's always worked)

In the court of public opinion though... he is lower than low. Sarah ditto for her ridiculous week or more of her burbling on with what a kind thoughtful honest man he is. Obviously living in a 30 roomed massive pile has worked its magic!

He certainly won't be able to travel extensively (for golf!) in the US anymore, in fact I wonder if he can travel outside the UK even? Who knows, I won't be losing any sleep over it.
I do have some sympathy with his daughters. They are guilty by association, unfortunately for them.

I'm absolutely not an apologist for PA but can anyone (preferably a crime lawyer) explain why Cressida Dick is re-opening the Met's file on Epstein at this stage? Is this a cynical and very late political move in support of #MeToo? Does she expect to charge the dead guy and/or PA with something? Should she be keeping her nose out of a civil case in another jurisdiction and does it set a dangerous precedent if she doesn't (I'm thinking of all the one-sided extraditions of 'ordinary' citizens)? Is it because the Met failed to do its job the first time around and she's covering herself? Sorry for all the ?? but I was WTAF at some of the things she came out with, in this morning's interview.