Thursday, 21st November 2024

US court rules against Prince Andrew, likely to face civil sex assault case

Royal Prince Andrew is going to be sued by a woman in the U.S. because she says that Prince Andrew sexually assaulted her when she was 17.

Wednesday, 12th January 2022

US court rules against Prince Andrew, likely to face civil sex assault case
Royal Prince Andrew is going to be sued by a woman in the U.S. because she says that Prince Andrew sexually assaulted her when she was 17. As per Virginia Roberts (now Giuffre), she is suing the prince because he abused her in 2001. Following years of trials, a judge in New York said the case could be heard.

Prince Andrew always denied the claims, and Buckingham Palace said it would not say anything about a legal case that is still going on.

It was detailed in a 46-page decision by Judge Lewis A. Kaplan, who is in charge of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.

Prince is now is 61 years old and the case against him could be heard this year.

In court documents, Ms. Giuffre said that the late billionaire financier Epstein sex trafficked and abused her, and that she was a victim of his crimes. Part of her abuse, she says, was being loaned out to other powerful men.

He told BBC Newsnight in 2019 that he had no memory of ever meeting Virginia Giuffre, and that her account of them having sex "didn't happen."

His lawyers said that when she agreed to settle her damages claim against Epstein in 2009, she agreed not to sue anyone else connected to him.

Virtually, they said the Duke of York was a "potential defendant" as defined by the agreement. They said the case should be dropped.

Only the people who agreed to the settlement could get money from it, not a "third party," says Ms Giuffre's lawyer.

A judge said the agreement "cannot be said" to help the Duke of York. He said he didn't take into account the "defendant's efforts to cast doubt on the truth of Ms. Giuffre's claims, even though his efforts would be legal at trial."

Now, it isn't up to the court to figure out what the people who signed a release in 2009 meant.