Virginia Roberts Will Only Accept A Settlement From Prince Andrew If It ‘Holds Him To Account’, Says Her Lawyer

186

Virginia Roberts Will Only Accept A Settlement From Prince Andrew If It 'Holds Him To Account', Says Her Lawyer

Virginia Roberts will only accept a settlement from Prince Andrew if it ‘holds him to account’, according to
her lawyer, as he described the Duke of York’s denial of ever meeting Ms. Roberts
as ‘incomprehensible’.

David Boies, Ms. Roberts’ New York attorney, said Ms. Roberts does not
want a settlement that would allow Andrew to ‘escape’ responsibility due to his
‘position’ and ‘wealth’, according to reports.

The lawyer also said that Ms. Roberts would also be unlikely to settle
the lawsuit outside of court if the Duke of York continued to deny meeting her,
as he did in his famous BBC Newsnight
interview.

Legal experts had predicted Andrew, 61, would seek a settlement, but
Andrew has taken the dramatic decision to face his accuser in court and become
the first member of the modern royal family to submit to being cross-examined over
serious allegations.

The lawsuit has come during the same year as the Queen’s platinum
jubilee, and Mr. Boies admitted that he did feel pain for Her Majesty that the
legal action was being played out so ‘publicly’, describing it as a ‘mother’s
worst nightmare’.

But Mr. Boies told The Telegraph the Queen, nor Prince
Andrew’s daughters Beatrice and Eugenie, will not be deposed if the case goes
to court, saying it is likely that Andrew’s conversations with his mother will
not be used as he ‘probably’ won’t admit to them. 

Ms. Roberts filed over 15 pages of court documents at New York’s
southern district court in August 2021 in which she formally accused the Royal
of sexual abuse while she was being trafficked by billionaire paedophile
Jeffrey Epstein.

Ms. Giuffre claims she was trafficked by convicted paedophile Jeffrey
Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell to have sex with Prince Andrew three times when
she was a teenager. The Duke of York vehemently denies the allegations.

Virginia Roberts Will Only Accept A Settlement From Prince Andrew If It 'Holds Him To Account', Says Her Lawyer

Papers filed by Prince Andrew’s legal counsel Andrew Brettler this week
contained 41 separate denials of claims made by Roberts in August 2021 last
year.

Legal experts had predicted Andrew would seek a settlement,
but David Boies, Ms. Roberts’ New York attorney, has said they would only
accept a settlement if it held Andrew ‘to account’.

He told The Telegraph: ‘What’s important for Virginia is to vindicate
herself and the other victims. Not to let someone escape responsibility, just
because of their wealth and power. To hold Prince Andrew to account.’ 

Mr. Boies said they would be ‘unlikely’ to settle if the Duke of
York, who is fighting the case as a ‘private citizen’ after he lost his royal
titles, continued to deny ever meeting Ms. Roberts.

Andrew previously insisted during his BBC Newsnight interview that he
has no memory of meeting Miss Roberts, saying: ‘I have no recollection of ever
meeting this lady, none whatsoever.’ 

Although Mr. Boies said the legal team were looking forward to
‘confronting’ the royal about his ‘denials’, he insisted they tried to
avoid bringing the lawsuit and attempted mediation.

But he claimed it was Andrew’s ‘incomprehensible’ denial of meeting Ms. Roberts that led to the lawsuit, saying it went against overwhelming
testimonies and ‘strong evidence’ that he did meet her.

He added: ‘We tried to avoid litigation; we suggested a mediation. But
to say ‘I never met her’ is so contrary to all the other evidence that’s out
there.’

If the case does go to court, Mr. Boies said while Andrew’s conversations
with the Queen ‘could be used’, he said they were unlikely to get at them as
they will not depose the Queen and said he was ‘probably not’ going to admit to
them.

He said: ‘So while those conversations are fair game, on a practical
level we’re probably not going to get at them.’

The lawsuit has come during the same year as the Queen’s platinum
jubilee, and Mr. Boies admitted it does pain him for the lawsuit to be playing
out in such a public way because of Andrew’s position. 

‘This has got to be any mother’s nightmare,’ he added. 

Legal experts had predicted Andrew would seek a settlement after the
Queen removed his military roles and patronages, widely seen as the monarchy
distancing itself from any potentially damaging developments.

But Andrew has taken the dramatic decision to face his accuser in court
and become the first member of the modern royal family to submit to being
cross-examined over serious allegations.

It comes after papers filed by Andrew’s legal counsel Andrew Brettler,
contained 41 separate denials of claims made by Roberts in August 2021 last
year. 

But the document, which spanned 11 pages, also shows 40 separate
instances in which Andrew said that he ‘lacks sufficient information to admit
or deny’ parts of Roberts’ claim.

Prince Andrew has always vehemently denied the claims, while
Giuffre has requested ‘punitive damages’ be awarded by a judge and
demanded a ‘trial by jury’ for the ‘physical, psychological’ injuries she says
she suffered. Experts believe this could cost the royal £10million if he
settles.

The Duke of York, who is now fighting the case as a ‘private citizen’
after his mother the Queen cut him adrift, told BBC Newsnight that he has ‘no recollection
of ever meeting this lady, none whatsoever’. 

He also insisted in his notorious in 2019 he wasn’t a party prince and
did not sweat ‘profusely’ when allegedly dancing with Miss Roberts at a
celebrity night-spot in London, because he was shot at in the Falklands and had
a rare medical condition which meant he could not perspire. 

And his alibi was a dinner at Pizza Express in Woking with his daughter
Princess Beatrice. 

Another factor the duke’s legal team asked the court to consider was the
issue of consent.

The document reads: ‘Assuming, without admitting, that Giuffre has
suffered any injury or damage alleged in the complaint, Giuffre’s claims are
barred by the doctrine of consent.’

The duke also claimed the case should be ‘barred in whole or in part by
her own wrongful conduct’.

Andrew’s lawyers also asserted that Ms. Giuffre should not be able to
proceed because her claim for damages is ‘too speculative to be recovered at
law’.

This appears to show the duke claiming Ms. Giuffre’s allegations cannot
be proved with reasonable certainty, which would leave jurors speculating as to
the actual damages suffered.

The document also argues that the claims should be dismissed because Ms. Giuffre is a permanent resident of Australia.

In the 11-page document, Andrew denied being a close friend of Maxwell
or being a frequent guest at Epstein’s homes.

The duke has also denied that he refused to cooperate with US
authorities in their investigation and prosecution of Epstein.

Andrew’s lawyers have also stated he did not throw Maxwell a birthday
party at Sandringham, and ‘lacked sufficient information to admit or deny’
inviting Epstein to his daughter’s 18th birthday party a month after the
financier became a convicted sex offender.

Media lawyer Mark Stephens earlier warned that the bombshell lawsuit
could ‘overshadow’ Her Majesty’s Platinum Jubilee – and ultimately risks
‘bringing down the monarchy’.

But he admitted it could be a final piece of ‘classic brinkmanship’ to
force down the reputed £10million settlement he may have to offer to Miss
Roberts, who now uses her married name, Giuffre. He also speculated on whether
the duke is ‘bluffing’ and may still settle to avoid damaging the standing of
the monarchy.

‘I think he’s buying time for settlement. David Boies wants to get to
the Queen’s money, which won’t happen. But we are just 10 days from Ascension
Day and the beginning of the Platinum Jubilee,’ Mr. Stephens said.

Kate MacNab, a solicitor at Reeds Solicitors, told MailOnline: ‘It may
seem like an odd route to take – betting on public opinion – after his
performance on Newsnight, but perhaps he is just biding his time?

‘Perhaps by agreeing to her initial wish of having a jury trial, he is
wanting to position himself as having nothing to hide? Perhaps this will force
an out-of-court settlement? All of this is speculation of course, but nothing
would surprise me at this stage.’

Lawyers for the Queen’s second son said that Andrew ‘hereby demands a
trial by jury on all causes of action asserted in the complaint’ because he
denies ‘any and all wrongdoing’. 

Experts say it further confirms why Her Majesty ‘swiftly and ruthlessly’
forced Andrew to step down from his remaining royal patronages and demanded he
fights the case as a ‘private citizen’.

Mr. Stephens went on: ‘The reason we think he’s got to settle is because
of the timing. Essentially this case is going to take up the rest of this year
and if it takes up the rest of this year, that’s the whole of his mother’s
Platinum Jubilee. 

‘The only thing he could have done to stop this getting worse is to have
pulled the case and stopped it in some way so there was no alternative news.
This is going to be crippling if he really is dead set on running this to a
trial.’

He continued: ‘I can’t conceive that the Royal Family will allow him to
run this case and overshadow the Platinum Jubilee. It’s going to spark a debate
about the relevancy and appropriateness of the Royal Family. The more detail
that comes out the more there’s going to be a problem for the wider royal
family.’

Commenting on lurid details that may emerge from the trial, Mr. Stephens
said: ‘For example, questions will be asked of Virginia Giuffre about the
prince’s body, any marks, his performance, what positions were adopted – every
detail that is conceivable to ask will be put to Andrew.’

Royal expert and former MP Norman Baker said Buckingham Palace ‘won’t
like’ what could come out at trial, warning: ‘This is going to be very
damaging’.

‘This morning the Palace will be looking on in horror at what Prince
Andrew is doing,’ he said, adding: ‘I suspect he won’t give evidence and will
allow his lawyers to handle it for him. Clearly, if he doesn’t give evidence
while pushing for a trial, that will not go down well with any jury.’

In his official response to claims made against him by Miss Roberts five
months ago, the duke issued 41 denials, rejecting all allegations of wrongdoing
– but said a further 40 times that he ‘lacks sufficient information to admit or
deny’ other claims.

He also submitted 11 defenses calling for the case to be dismissed,
including that Miss Roberts’ claims should be barred by ‘her own wrongful
conduct’ and ‘unclean hands’. His decision to go ahead with the case puts him
in contravention with the Royal Family.

Legal commentator Joshua Rozenberg has said the Duke of York’s demand
for a jury trial is him stating ‘bring it on’.

Virginia Roberts Will Only Accept A Settlement From Prince Andrew If It 'Holds Him To Account', Says Her Lawyer

He told BBC Breakfast: ‘Those (a trial by jury) are certainly the words
with which this page 11 defense ends but it was Virginia Giuffre who asked for
a jury trial, demanded a jury trial, in her claim.

‘And so what you’ve really got here is Prince Andrew saying, ‘Bring it
on. You want a jury trial? I want a jury trial. You want to bring these claims?
Well, in that case, you have to prove everything that you’re saying because
I’m not going to admit to anything’.

He added the case could still settle out of court but added that
‘nevertheless the prince is saying that he denies everything’.

Prince Andrew’s official rebuttal of Giuffre’s claims comes just weeks
after The Queen stripped him of his honorary titles, meaning he can no longer
be referred to as ‘His Royal Highness’ in any capacity.

Andrew, who remains Duke of York, also loses his military titles and
royal patronages ‘with the Queen’s approval and agreement’, Buckingham Palace
said in a terse statement that brought his 61 years as a senior royal to a
shocking end. 

The Queen’s decision made on January 13 followed the day after Andrew’s
motion to have the case against him dismissed on a legal technicality was
unequivocally thrown out by a US judge. 

Judge Lewis Kaplan sensationally dismissed an application from the Duke
of York’s lawyers to have the case shut down – freeing Ms. Giuffre to pursue her
high-profile case in a US court later this year. 

Andrew’s attorneys had unsuccessfully argued that her case should have
been thrown out because of a newly-unsealed $500,000 settlement with Jeffrey
Epstein.

Brettler argued the settlement protected Andrew because it
contained a clause in which Giuffre agreed not to take legal action against
‘potential defendants’. 

But Judge Kaplan said the court was not able to consider the duke’s
efforts to cast doubt on Giuffre’s claims or whether he was covered by the
settlement agreement, suggesting these were issues for a trial.

He said: ‘The 2009 agreement cannot be said to demonstrate, clearly and
unambiguously, the parties intended the instrument ”directly”, ”primarily”,
or ”substantially”, to benefit Prince Andrew.

‘The defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint or for a more definite
statement is denied in all respects.’

Earlier this month, sources close to the Duke confirmed that he was
selling his luxurious chalet in the exclusive Swiss ski resort of Verbier after
a mystery buyer agreed to take it off his hands.

Andrew was only able to sell the residence, called Chalet Helora, after
settling a £6.6million debt to French socialite Isabelle de Rouvre, 74, who
sold it to him and Sarah Ferguson in 2014 also for £18million. 

The deal led to speculation that he would use the money to pay his
rapidly expanding legal bills as he prepares to battle the lawsuit of Giuffre.

But Spencer Kuvin, who represented the victims of Epstein, believes the
sale could actually be designed to prevent Giuffre from seizing the Duke’s
assets.

The lawyer told the Mirror: ‘If Virginia gets a judgment against Andrew,
if this went all the way through to trial and she received a financial judgment
in her favour, she could execute on any properties he has, the most likely
being his ski chalet.

‘If Andrew had properties in any companion country that would abide by
such jurisdiction of the US, she can execute on those properties.’

He added: ‘If the Queen has transferred any property to him, anywhere
throughout the entire world, they could try and execute on that property if
successful in foreign courts.’

Andrew agreed with Ms de Rouvre that the chalet would be paid for in
installments.

But Ms de Rouvre claimed the Yorks failed to make the final installment
of £5m, resulting in her launching legal action against them in the Swiss
courts two years ago for the amount she was owed, plus interest, which came to
a combined £6.6 million.

Under Swiss law, he was prevented from selling the chalet until the
matter had been resolved.

Now that Andrew has paid the final installment and attached interest for
the chalet, he is now expected to sell the property in a matter of
weeks.  

 

Previous articleDuchess Of Cornwall Takes Over As Patron Of The National Theatre After Being Left ‘Miffed’ When The Position Was Handed To Meghan Markle
Next articleKate Middleton Replaces Prince Harry As Patron Of English Rugby… Pitting Her Against Husband William Who Backs Wales
Mr Priceless
A young person with a passion for success and excellence to develop a professional career that encourages empowerment in the overall development of a person which is achieved through hard work. A Journalist with facts and a difference; standing by the truth all the time with interests in Science & Technology, Health, Celebrities' Lifestyle, Crimes, Education and Career Improvement.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here