Liverpool: Police respond to incident on Princess Drive
We use your sign-up to provide content in ways you’ve consented to and to improve our understanding of you. This may include adverts from us and 3rd parties based on our understanding. You can unsubscribe at any time. More info
David Boies, who is representing Ms Giuffre in her case against the Duke of York, said both his client and her legal team were anticipating “confronting” the royal about his “denials”. He spoke shortly after it emerged that the duke, 61, was demanding a jury trial in his ongoing case with Ms Giuffre.
She claims that they had sex three times while she was a teenager who had been groomed and trafficked by convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.
Andrew has always strenuously denied all the allegations.
In court documents that emerged this evening, the duke submitted 11 reasons why the case should be dismissed.
These included that Ms Giuffre’s claims are “barred by the doctrine of consent” and by “her own wrongful conduct”.
Responding to this, Mr Boies said: “Prince Andrew continues his approach of denying any knowledge or information concerning the claims against him, and purporting to blame the victim of the abuse for somehow bringing it on herself.
“We look forward to confronting Prince Andrew with his denials and attempts to blame Ms Giuffre for her own abuse at his deposition and at trial.”
In the court document which communicated his reasons for requesting a dismissal of the case, Andrew’s lawyers concluded: “Prince Andrew hereby demands a trial by jury on all causes of action asserted in the complaint.”
American Judge Lewis A Kaplan previously denied the duke’s application to dismiss the case earlier this month.
Kate Middleton’s Prince George dilemma: ‘Sooner than she might like’ [ANALYSIS]
Prince George’s school left the young royal ‘confused and angry’ [INSIGHT]
Prince Andrew was ‘thrown out of office’ in Buckingham Palace [REVEALED]
His legal team – led by Andrew Brettler – argued that a 2009 agreement between Ms Giuffre and Epstein meant that she waived her right to bring any future civil action against him or anyone connected to him in exchange for £370,000.
Outlining his decision, Judge Kaplan said the court was not able at this stage to consider the duke’s efforts to cast doubt on Ms Giuffre’s claims or whether he was covered by the settlement agreement.
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 latest document by Andrew reiterates this position and adds 10 more reasons why the case should be dismissed.
It also asked the court to consider the issue of consent.
It says: “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”.
This appears to show the duke claiming Ms Giuffre’s claims cannot be proved with reasonable certainty, which would leave jurors speculating as to the actual damages suffered.
Source: Read Full Article