Epstein / Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor / Maxwell

  • Thread starter Thread starter mat
  • Start date Start date
kaz7 said:
He couldnt even with stand the matlis interview, he would have had no chance of hours under oath by a cut throat barrister, he caved imo, also by doing this he lets the queen have her jubilee celebrations in peace
Click to expand...
He may even be invited to the party
 
The BBC correspondents take on it is interesting.

The deal struck between Prince Andrew and Virginia Giuffre means averting the royal disaster zone of a court battle in New York in the autumn.
Even though the amounts are not being disclosed, this will come at a very significant financial cost to the prince.
But there is also the reputational cost. Prince Andrew, whose legal team had been attacking Ms Giuffre's claims, has signed up to a statement acknowledging her as a "victim of abuse" and commending her "bravery".
The deal avoids any suggestion of Prince Andrew being personally involved in wrongdoing, but it also says nothing about removing the accusations that Ms Giuffre made against him.
It means this damaging civil court case is over and the jubilee year won't be clouded by damaging headlines.
But Prince Andrew has ended up paying up and expressing regret, rather than clearing his name.
 
kaz7 said:
95% of yank cases are settled before court , it is not a criminal case , she has forced him to settle therefore admitting he is in the wrong and he has had to give her probably several million to her charity , he knew he had no leg to stand on at a trial
Click to expand...
BBC confirmed she has got a big wedge out of him and her charity gets some too.
 
The scene in a future series of The Crown where Andrew asks his mum for the money to pay off Virginia Giuffre. 20220215_182351.jpg
 
denislawsbackheel said:
BBC confirmed she has got a big wedge out of him and her charity gets some too.
Click to expand...
Being "forced to settle" admits nothing. It can also be perceived as the plaintiff conceding.
denislawsbackheel said:
BBC confirmed she has got a big wedge out of him and her charity gets some too.
Click to expand...

kaz7 said:
95% of yank cases are settled before court , it is not a criminal case , she has forced him to settle therefore admitting he is in the wrong and he has had to give her probably several million to her charity , he knew he had no leg to stand on at a trial
Click to expand...
It "admits" nothing of the sort. That's the whole point of a settlement.
 
If he was not guilty and felt he could prove it, why didn't he get his legal team to get her to withdraw her accusations against him, when issuing a joint statement
He obviously didn't and that says to me GUILTY by default
 
kaz7 said:
By giving her charity millions
Click to expand...

so if your a multi billionaire its ok to do whatever you like because you can pay your way out of trouble ?
like i said this is sending out the wrong message to the victims and for them to come forward.
today she has let down and the charity by taking the money ? its now ok to pay your way out of trouble

you might as well close the charity down because its saying ITS OK to be a victim here is your pay out ?
why settle out of court ? i don't under stand it. the whole case was about making stand against the crime
bringing justice to the victims and having the accused found guilty
 
Keep the Faith said:
If he was not guilty and felt he could prove it, why didn't he get his legal team to get her to withdraw her accusations against him, when issuing a joint statement
He obviously didn't and that says to me GUILTY by default
Click to expand...

being found guilty in a court of law ? over being guilty is now worth millions
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top