Prince Andrew Thread 3

[Roussette]

Here is the previous thread...

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/the_royal_family/4443261-Prince-Andrew-Thread-2?watched=1&msgid=114083283#114083283

@Ahalam

I’m a bit dubious about the stories about Prince Andrew’s teddy bears. Are they trying to lay the groundwork to suggest he has low IQ or special needs?

Odd stories like that are circulated to try and game Google. If enough outlets slavishly circulate the story then - for a few moments - whenever you type "Prince Andrew" (or it's related variants) into Google, you'll just get an anodyne story about Teddy Bears. Which is quite handy for people outside the UK to see.

It won't last long. Googles page ranking (which is as secret as Coca Colas secret sauce) is much more sophisticated and takes a lot more feeding to distort. And they are incredibly good at spotting agencies trying to plant trends.

Being able to get what you want to the top of Google for free is the holy grail of advertisers, marketeers, corrupt politicians and pervert princes.

Do you remember that farcical "story" a while back about Boris liking to build model buses ? That was planted to try to skew what came up if you were searching for "Boris" and "Bus" to try to hide the images and stories of him in front of a bus promising the NHS £350 million a week when we left the EU.

I reckon the words Meat Loaf quoted "You cant touch me I'm Royal" are exactly what PA believed his whole life. That he could associate with a convicted paedophile go to JE's parties and it didn't matter because he thought he was untouchable.

Odd stories like that are circulated to try and game Google. If enough outlets slavishly circulate the story then - for a few moments - whenever you type "Prince Andrew" (or it's related variants) into Google, you'll just get an anodyne story about Teddy Bears. Which is quite handy for people outside the UK to see

I doubt that's the origin.

Because it came to light during the most recent ITV documentary, and it wasn't an anodyne story. It was a direct criticism of both the oddness of such a collection of children's toys but also his excessive/controlling/abusive behaviour

Wasn’t the teddy bear story when he was 6? Not defending him, but my kids have been a bit OCD about stuff like that when they were toddlers.

Wasn’t the teddy bear story when he was 6?

No.

@Billlius

Wasn’t the teddy bear story when he was 6? Not defending him, but my kids have been a bit OCD about stuff like that when they were toddlers.

I’m not sure they had laminated photos then

@Faevern

I reckon the words Meat Loaf quoted "You cant touch me I'm Royal" are exactly what PA believed his whole life. That he could associate with a convicted paedophile go to JE's parties and it didn't matter because he thought he was untouchable.

And also the reason that he thought THAT tv interview would put a stop to everything. All he had to do was claim to be at Pizza Express, that he can't sweat...and describe Epstein's behaviour as 'unbecoming' and it would make everything go away cos he is royal...

A loooong time ago, when Eugenie was an older teen, I gave her lessons in a hobby she wanted to learn. She came a good few times and every time she was accompanied by Sarah's sister and a body guard. These were booked well ahead, so I don't for one second believe that the Pizza Express story could be confirmed swiftly.

An update from Adam Klasfeld
Prince Andrew has demanded a trial by jury in the sex abuse lawsuit filed by Virginia Giuffre.

Here are two of the 11 affirmative defenses he has asserted so far.

twitter.com/KlasfeldReports/status/1486415223561019400?t=Rilcp-EIwhZ-I7ecLgPhUQ&s=19

I don't quite understand what all means, will need to read a bit more.

He did so well last time he was questioned about the allegations. I'm sure this will work out splendidly for him...

Interesting. I rather think he’s misjudged his popularity!

David Boies statement

I just read this too. What implications does trial by jury have I wonder.

'Prince Andrew demands'

No idea what the gameplay is here but 'demanding' is absolutely the story of his life...

@DuncinToffee quick translation
5. AW doesn't admit that VRG has suffered any injury, damage, or loss that would result in her being awarded compensation BUT even if the court finds that AW "did have sex with that woman," VRG should not recover compensation from AW because she consented, [consent is a defence to a civil action, subject to various critera]

1. VRG is barred from pursuing a claim/recovering compensation where the harm allegedly suffered by her has come about because of her own actions and conduct [litigants are supposed to come to court with 'clean hands' - ie.a claimant should be deprived of all court-based remedies, because of some dishonesty, misrepresentation, illegality or unfairness on their part'

It's a Defence, nothing more, and just restates what his lawyers have already said. Wonder what the other 9 grounds are?

Thanks dopenguinsdance, that is really helpful.

Prince Andrew has demanded a trial by jury in the sex abuse lawsuit filed by Virginia Giuffre

Where - in the US or UK?

Link to full document storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.564713/gov.uscourts.nysd.564713.71.0.pdf

It doesn't make a lot of sense without VWR's original Complaint, so here's the case file link if anyone's bothered.
www.courtlistener.com/docket/60119368/giuffre-v-prince-andrew/

Looks like he's hoping to rely on a 'preponderance' (or not) of evidence:

r4dn.com/what-does-trial-by-jury-in-civil-cases-mean/

Double or quits.

@ Puzzledandpissedoff in the USA, where the case is proceeding. Civil jury trials in England & Wales are limited. The County Courts Act 1984 sets out guidelines on when a jury should be used for a civil trial. So, where the case involves libel or slander (defamation), false imprisonment; malicious prosecution or fraud it can go before a jury. But a jury trial can be refused if the presiding judge in sme instances so it isn't a given, even in cases of this type.

I believe that trial by jury in civil cases is enshrined in the US constitution & confirmed by federal law ( happy to be corrected).

I'm not sure that there's necessarily an advantage in having the jury as far as AW is concerned. Maybe the tactic is about being seen to be bullish about his chances of convincing a jury at this stage?

Time to bring out Jason Bull & Cal Lightman?

@CathyorClaire ...because it worked so well for Maxwell?

[quote dopenguinsdance]@CathyorClaire ...because it worked so well for Maxwell?[/quote]
Well, he's not noted for taking note.

Apparently he's also claiming Maxwell wasn't a close friend.

Dunno how that's going to play given the Balmoral private lodge and the BP throne room photos bu there you go.

Apparently he's also claiming Maxwell wasn't a close friend

That's a joke.
The security at BP have said she was in and out of there continually. There's photos of her at Sandringham, Balmoral, BPalace, she attended parties with the RF etc.
Stupid fool trying that one