Prince Andrew Thread 2

[Roussette]

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/4442126-Prince-Andrew

Here is previous thread.

I've started a new thread because today and tomorrow is crucial as far as the pending civil case.

And I also had a few comments I wanted to say to posters at the end of the last thread, but it ran out.

www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jan/05/ghislaine-maxwell-trial-prosecutors-judge-inquiry-juror

He says he "flew through" the questionnaire and doesn't recall any relevant questions.

I doubt very much he's said this because he was paid to. He's potentially in hot and deep water anyway if he lied on the questionnaire or at best took it so flippantly that he didn't read it properly. I think he's just playing the hero.

One of the questions was

"Have you or a friend or family member ever been the victim of sexual harassment, sexual abuse, or sexual assault?”

@KimikosNightmare

www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jan/05/ghislaine-maxwell-trial-prosecutors-judge-inquiry-juror

He says he "flew through" the questionnaire and doesn't recall any relevant questions.

I doubt very much he's said this because he was paid to. He's potentially in hot and deep water anyway if he lied on the questionnaire or at best took it so flippantly that he didn't read it properly. I think he's just playing the hero.

One of the questions was

"Have you or a friend or family member ever been the victim of sexual harassment, sexual abuse, or sexual assault?”

I don't get the impression he was paid.

I get the sense of someone proud of what they have done without understanding the consequences of the disclosures they have made in the press.

Whose fault is that?

His for lying on a questionnaire or the system for not making clear the potential consequences of doing so?

Though to add I've a big problem with the question as I think I'd be hard pressed to find any woman I know personally whose not been sexually harassed at some point in their lives.

If that excludes women from serving on a jury re: any sex crime, I think there is a bigger issue here than this case.

I don't know how the US jury system works but the necessity of taking court proceedings seriously, what juries can discuss outside the jury room (in the UK , nothing) what their role is is hammered home.

I would be very surprised if the necessity of completing the questionnaire honestly and accurately had not been made clear.

@GoatInCaptivity

Though to add I've a big problem with the question as I think I'd be hard pressed to find any woman I know personally whose not been sexually harassed at some point in their lives.

If that excludes women from serving on a jury re: any sex crime, I think there is a bigger issue here than this case.

Presumably the form will then ask for details of what the harassment is and whether they consider it will affect their judgement.

I could answer no to that question.

Even including friends and family members, kimiko? I agree with PP, the question is so broad it would rule out virtually all women and most men.

@GoatInCaptivity

Though to add I've a big problem with the question as I think I'd be hard pressed to find any woman I know personally whose not been sexually harassed at some point in their lives.

If that excludes women from serving on a jury re: any sex crime, I think there is a bigger issue here than this case.

The question I believe related to "sexual abuse' though not 'sexual harassment'.

If it was sexual harassment then I'd agree that finding a female who hasn't had any sort of sexual harassment over their lifetime probably would be difficult but actual sexual abuse?

What a bloody idiot! Could he have been planted by the defence and this was all planned by them ? Or have I been watching too many crime films

If a mistrial is declared, I guess this doesn't make GM innocent (until proven guilty) again? Will it affect VG claim against PA ?

Apologies - I have just read the full question and it does make reference to sexual harassment as well as sexual abuse.

A friend of 20 years disclosed to me she was gang raped as a teenager. She is now in her early 60's another told me after knowing them for 10+ yes that she was sa by an older man. I've worked in the field/ or related for 30yrs + it is known that many victims speak about things much later or possibly never do. Sexual harassment is commonplace for women and girls, abuse often, is not that uncommon. The JE case like many others is showing that abuse to young girls is on an industrial scale.
Personally, I think it depends on the individual. It can be more helpful to have someone who understands the process of manipulation and grooming as well as power imbalances between the perpetrator and the victim. For example many people as seen on this or other threads do not appear to understand that CONSENT to sexual activity is the key to deciding if abuse/rape took place. That and other evidence, forensic, independent witness(es) etc.
So I would have an issue with people (mainly female) being excluded on this basis. Though I do understand the reasons for this basis, I think it could be better handled

@Vapeyvapevape

What a bloody idiot! Could he have been planted by the defence and this was all planned by them ? Or have I been watching too many crime films

If a mistrial is declared, I guess this doesn't make GM innocent (until proven guilty) again? Will it affect VG claim against PA ?

Yes, it does entitle her to the presumption of innocence again. She would be in the same position as if the trial had never happened. The most likely way forward would be a retrial, but it wouldn't surprise me if the defence tried to argue that publicity since her conviction has been prejudicial and a fair trial is no longer possible.

I don't think it would affect VG's claim. That doesn't appear to be dependent on anything Maxwell did or didn't do.

Reading what he has said, I suspect he has no idea that his comments could lead to the judge deciding it was a mistrial. He seems genuinely proud about what he sees as his role in making sure Maxwell was brought to justice

Surely, he must be stupid then. Even I would know this is a big no-no.

The most likely way forward would be a retrial, but it wouldn't surprise me if the defence tried to argue that publicity since her conviction has been prejudicial and a fair trial is no longer possible.

It would surely be hard to find a less well-publicised case than this? And with the question of needing jurors without any background or strong opinions on this type of abuse?

I can't say I'm comfortable with the conditions she's been under for the best part of 2 years though. If someone had woken me every 15 minutes at night just for a single week, I don't think I'd be physically capable of handling cross-examination in court. After 2 years, I'd be seriously wondering about the Alzheimer's risk incurred.

*more, not less well-publicised.

@prh47bridge thank you for answering all my questions, I (quite clearly ! ) have little legal knowledge and feel a bit behind those that do I'm just trying to get my head around it all.

I saw it explained like this

The question is if the juror lied/failed to disclose material info and separately whether there was misconduct during deliberations. And if yes, whether it prejudiced right to fair trial/impartial jury.

There have been other more publicised cases such as Jeffrey Dahmer. We cant say some people are unprosecutable because their crimes are so horrific that everyone has heard about them.

@RoyalFamilyFan

There have been other more publicised cases such as Jeffrey Dahmer. We cant say some people are unprosecutable because their crimes are so horrific that everyone has heard about them.

No, we can't and we don't. The question, if the defence tries this, is whether the judge believes it is possible to find a jury that will hear the case fairly. There are a lot of people on here who clearly made up their minds about Maxwell before the trial even started. That isn't what you want from jurors. You need a jury that will decide the case on the evidence presented, not on what they've read in the press or on social media.

Surely if they managed somehow to find a jury like that for Dahmer, they can find it for Maxwell? Not everyone follows the news.

How do they decide ? If a mistrial is declared but they can't be sure they can find an impartial jury for a new trial, what happens then ? She goes free ?

Regarding the Juror contradicting the defence “expert”, I highly recommend (yet again) listening to the RCP podcast episodes on the trial. They discuss this so-called expert who admitted that she had never carried out any of her research in real world situations and had no experience of working with victims of sexual abuse.

She also apparently contradicted her own testimony at one point but because the trial was behind closed doors it’s not known if she was pulled up on it.

@Vapeyvapevape

How do they decide ? If a mistrial is declared but they can't be sure they can find an impartial jury for a new trial, what happens then ? She goes free ?

Do they have 'professional jurors' for these cases? Say, a bank of retired lawyers, social workers, nurses etc? People who are sufficiently case hardened by the everyday horrors that they've seen as part of their professional lives.

@RoyalFamilyFan

Surely if they managed somehow to find a jury like that for Dahmer, they can find it for Maxwell? Not everyone follows the news.

I doubt the defence will succeed in persuading the judge that a fair trial is not possible. However, the issue is that, pre-conviction and certainly pre-trial, the press may be careful about what they say and what information they publish for fear of prejudicing the trial. Post-conviction, that is no longer a concern. It is, therefore, possible that things that have been published post-conviction that are more prejudicial than any of the pre-trial publicity.

@Vapeyvapevape

How do they decide ? If a mistrial is declared but they can't be sure they can find an impartial jury for a new trial, what happens then ? She goes free ?

Yes. If someone can't be given a fair trial, they can't be tried at all. I doubt that will happen in all honesty, but you never know.

Also, what about the costs of defending yourself again in your second trial? Doubt that's a real issue here, but for most people it would be highly significant.