Prince Andrew Can't Sweat

Gow can any of them at all be trusted, frankly?

I don’t trust anyone involved or American justice

I'm not overly impressed with the justice system there, either.
Just as well I'm not involved, even on the periphery, of any crime there.

Agree

Its still legal in several US states for child marriage ,apparently as long as the parents agree even if the child doesn't

I can remember Jerry Lee Lewis came for a U.K. tour and he was married to a 13 year old , cause a storm

I’ll just be interested to see which version of the American law they go with.

The legal age for consent in New York and U.K. is 17 ,

And how does the law stand around trafficking?

Is he being made a scapegoat ?

No idea MissAdventure

I think so EllanVannin

MissAdventure how very sad about your girl. ?

I never watched the Panorama programme with PA. Can anyone give me a potted version of it please ?

If he is stripped of his title I wonder how this will affect his relationship with Fergie.

Oopsadaisy “His Smugness” haha, love it (and from reports from people who know him, just right)
I think he has naively got himself into a spot of bother…

My husband does not sweat. Should I be suspicious?

Does he spend time with traffickers?
If so, I would say yes.

Can he say where he was, on instant recall, 12 years ago BigBertha? Any branch of Pizza Express will do.

Does he look like this when he's not sweating?

Just to remind everyone that Prince Andrew hasn't been convicted of any crime. Nor has he admitted any. In the eyes of the law he is an innocent man.
No, I am not being ironic. I believe in the principal of "innocent til proven guilty". It has served us well for 800 years.

I don't think anyone has said that he is guilty.
Just pointed out some of the issues surrounding the situation.

paddyann54

How many had sex with TRAFFICKED humans though Atqui and ther is the difference .Most ,not all.prostitutes are working for reasons of their own .Might be financial difficulties or drugs but its their choice .Not so with people who are trafficked,its a criminal offence to use people this way .

It's interesting to know you think that prostitution is a lifestyle choice.

Germanshepherdsmum

Quite so Annie. If he were a commoner there would be little interest and if he had little money VG wouldn’t bother suing him.

If he had little money he wouldn't be on the list anyway!

How did Epstein become so wealthy? His business acumen?

BBC news now:

Virginia Giuffre agreed not to sue anyone connected to Jeffrey Epstein who could be described as a "potential defendant", a 2009 damages settlement against the sex offender shows.

The document, disclosed by a New York court, reveals the financier paid her $500,000 (£371,000) to end her claim.

Ms Giuffre is suing the Duke of York in a civil case for allegedly sexually assaulting her 20 years ago, when she was a teenager. He has consistently denied the claims.

The document was released ahead of a critical hearing on Tuesday in the civil case involving Prince Andrew - and the interpretation of the settlement will form a central plank of the argument between the two sides.
Although the settlement does not mention the prince by name, his lawyers say this 2009 deal means she cannot sue him - because she agreed to end all legal action against anyone connected to the offender who could be described as a "potential defendant".

A source in Prince Andrew's legal team said "Giuffre referred to 'royalty' in her 2009 claim [against Jeffrey Epstein] and that means Prince Andrew was covered by the deal.

He's probably not sweating a little less tonight.

Yes I am no lawyer but I would say she has had her money and should not get any more. Maybe she knew that the case would get thrown out but just wanted the publicity to bring some justice against Andrew as the courts seemed to be doing nothing.

“The settlement between Epstein and Giuffre

The agreement states that it is a "final resolution" of a disputed claim filed in Florida and is intended to avoid litigation but "shall not be construed to be an admission of liability or fault by any party." The agreement states that it is not to be used in civil or criminal proceedings against Epstein. It was signed by Giuffre and Epstein on different dates in November 2009.

Giuffre's attorney David Boies issued a statement saying the settlement is "irrelevant" to her claim against the prince.

The release does not mention Prince Andrew. He did not even know about it," Boies said. "He could not have been a 'potential defendant' in the settled case against Jeffrey Epstein both because he was not subject to jurisdiction in Florida and because the Florida case involved federal claims to which he was not a part. The actual parties to the release have made clear that Prince Andrew was not covered by it.

Lastly, the reason we sought to have the release made public was to refute the claims being made about it by Prince Andrew's PR campaign."