Prince Andrew and the secret sealed document

[baz962]

I believe that in the US, if you don’t attend and mount a defence, judgement is given against you by default

What then if he refused to pay up or make good on the judgement. Didn't the police here say previously that there was no case. I know civil suits have a lower burden of proof , but would anyone be legally compelled to pay. Obviously if the judgement went against you then you probably wouldn't travel there again.

 

[JamesT]

What then if he refused to pay up or make good on the judgement.

He basically wouldn’t be able to visit US territory ever again without risking being arrested for failing to pay.
I don’t believe that imprisonment of a year or more is an option in a civil case, so extradition wouldn’t be possible.

 

[tspaul26]

I was wondering and hoping someone can answer a question. Obviously you have to turn up for a criminal trial , but what's the law as regards a civil suit. Not withstanding the status of a person , is a defendant legally required.

The accused does not always have to appear in person for criminal causes. I have dealt with a number where I was the only person there for my client. It is sometimes referred to as ‘compearance’.

In civil cases it is fairly routine for the parties not to attend. The majority of the civil litigation I undertake consists of a judge and the lawyers and that’s it, not even any live witnesses.

Also would the US have any legal standing if Prince Andrew or indeed any civilian , refused to attend.

That depends on what you mean by “refused” and “attend”. If by attendance you mean physical presence then this is not generally required unless there is a specific summons or subpoena.

Even then, it depends on what you mean by standing. I have not checked, but I understand that this case is proceeding in a state court which means that the US would (generally) not have ‘standing’ to do anything about breach of a summons.

Even if it did, you run up against the problem of the difference between different types of jurisdiction: even if the US has jurisdiction to order a person to attend, this does not mean that it has jurisdiction to enforce any such order.

I believe that in the US, if you don’t attend and mount a defence, judgement is given against you by default

The same applies is most legal systems by different names: judgment in default, in absentia, extract or extrait and so on.

What then if he refused to pay up or make good on the judgement.

The same as any other unpaid court order. The judgment is just a piece of paper at the end of the day. If the other party doesn’t pay voluntarily then you have to undertake diligence or enforcement action in order to actually get any cash, and quite often you won’t get the full amount of the order or, indeed, anything at all.

This case has the added complication of the international dimension so even if the plaintiff ‘wins’ she may well end up with a judgment and nothing else.

He basically wouldn’t be able to visit US territory ever again without risking being arrested for failing to pay.
I don’t believe that imprisonment of a year or more is an option in a civil case, so extradition wouldn’t be possible.

Extradition is highly unlikely no matter what the circumstances are. States do not generally seek to extradite the sons of foreign heads of state, for obvious reasons.

 

[brad465]

Andrew will give evidence under oath from London in March, as part of the civil sexual assault case against him:

Prince Andrew to give evidence in deposition in March

The Duke of York will face a deposition in London as part of the civil sexual assault case against him.

www.bbc.co.uk

The Duke of York will give evidence under oath next month in London as part of the civil sexual assault case against him.
Virginia Giuffre is suing Prince Andrew in the US, and the prince has repeatedly denied the allegations.
He will face a deposition, which means giving evidence to lawyers for use in court.
A date has been set for 10 March in London - which has been described as a neutral location.
Ms Giuffre says the duke - who is the Queen's third child - sexually assaulted her on three occasions when she was 17 and being trafficked by the late financier Jeffrey Epstein.
She says the duke abused her at Ghislaine Maxwell's home in London, in Epstein's mansion in New York and on Epstein's private island in the US Virgin Islands.
Epstein, a convicted sex offender, died in prison in 2019 while awaiting a sex trafficking trial.
Prince Andrew, 61, has denied all of the allegations, and his lawyers have said he is ready to go before a jury to fight the claim. He is not facing any legal action in the UK.

A source close to the duke told the PA news agency: "We agreed to voluntarily produce the duke for a deposition on 10 March. Despite repeated requests, Ms Giuffre still hasn't committed to a date or location for her deposition."
According to the Daily Telegraph - which first reported the news - his deposition will be conducted by Ms Giuffre's lawyers, David Boies and Sigrid McCawley, and is expected to last two days.
The deposition will be the point at which the prince puts his account on the record and he will likely face personal questions.
News of the deposition comes as the Queen held an event to celebrate her Platinum Jubilee - which officially begins on Sunday when she marks 70 years on the throne.

 

[LOL The Irony]

Andrew will give evidence under oath from London in March, as part of the civil sexual assault case against him:

Prince Andrew to give evidence in deposition in March

The Duke of York will face a deposition in London as part of the civil sexual assault case against him.

www.bbc.co.uk

Now if he'd done this from day one, instead of doing that newsnight interview...

 

[Bevan Price]

That might have worked in the first instance, but given that up until now he has strenuously denied any sexual contact occurred, it would be very difficult to now change his story to "Well, actually... but."

None of us know how many women Prince Andrew has been with. If it is just one or two, we might have expected him to remember them all. If it is dozens, or hundreds, then I would be surprised if he - or anyone - remembered every single woman.

 

[najaB]

If it is dozens, or hundreds, then I would be surprised if he - or anyone - remembered every single woman.

Agreed. But the problem is that he so strongly denied it that weakening his position to "Maybe, who knows?" just makes him look shifty (read "guilty").

 

[Strathclyder]

Andrew will give evidence under oath from London in March, as part of the civil sexual assault case against him:

Prince Andrew to give evidence in deposition in March

The Duke of York will face a deposition in London as part of the civil sexual assault case against him.

www.bbc.co.uk

Pity he didn't do this from the very start, would've avoided that clusterfudge of a Newsnight interview for one thing.

 

[brad465]

Now if he'd done this from day one, instead of doing that newsnight interview...

Pity he didn't do this from the very start, would've avoided that clusterfudge of a Newsnight interview for one thing.

Unless of course he really does have something to hide...

 

[AlterEgo]

The case has been settled out of court just now. https://twitter.com/joshuarozenberg/status/1493617572960419842?s=21

 

[brad465]

The case has been settled out of court just now. https://twitter.com/joshuarozenberg/status/1493617572960419842?s=21

Yes now got an article:

Prince Andrew settles US civil sex assault case with Virginia Giuffre

The duke will pay an undisclosed financial sum to Virginia Giuffre as part of the out-of-court settlement.

www.bbc.co.uk

Prince Andrew has settled a civil sexual assault case brought against him in the US by Virginia Giuffre, court documents show.
Ms Giuffre had been suing the Duke of York, claiming he sexually assaulted her on three occasions when she was 17, allegations he has repeatedly denied.
A document submitted to a US court on Tuesday said the duke and Ms Giuffre had reached an out of court settlement.
It said he would make a "substantial donation to Ms Giuffre's charity".
The document stated that Prince Andrew had "never intended to malign Ms Giuffre's character" and that he recognised she had "suffered both as an established victim of abuse and as a result of unfair public attacks".

 

[duncanp]

It is funny how the papers were reporting this morning that Ms Giuffre no longer has the original of that photo of her with Prince Andrew.

And now we find that the case has been settled out of court, despite Ms Giuffre originally stating that she would not settle in this way unless Prince Andrew admitted what he has done.

Perhaps Ms Giuffre was advised that there was insufficient evidence to win the civil case.

Nevertheless, there is no way back for Prince Andrew, whose reputation will be forever tarnished due to his association with Epstein and Maxwell.

 

[Strathclyder]

Nevertheless, there is no way back for Prince Andrew, whose reputation will be forever tarnished due to his association with Epstein and Maxwell.

Quite. Whatever the outcome of this legal battle, his reputation would've been in tatters, thanks to the associations you quote. In light of everything that's happened, the best thing he can do - if he has anything resembling self-preservation/self-awareness and given everything that's happened, I really doubt he has much of either - is just keep as low a profile as possible for the foreseeable future.

 

[Gloster]

Quite. Whatever the outcome of this legal battle, his reputation would've been in tatters, thanks to the associations you quote. In light of everything that's happened, the best thing he can do - if he has anything resembling self-preservation/self-awareness and given everything that's happened, I really doubt he has much of either - is just keep as low a profile as possible for the foreseeable future.

I think his mother may well make him keep his head down as she is much wiser than him and seems to be just about the only person who has any influence on him. Whether Charles will be able to do anything when it is his turn will be interesting to see.

 

[brad465]

Quite. Whatever the outcome of this legal battle, his reputation would've been in tatters, thanks to the associations you quote. In light of everything that's happened, the best thing he can do - if he has anything resembling self-preservation/self-awareness and given everything that's happened, I really doubt he has much of either - is just keep as low a profile as possible for the foreseeable future.

I think his mother may well make him keep his head down as she is much wiser than him and seems to be just about the only person who has any influence on him. Whether Charles will be able to do anything when it is his turn will be interesting to see.

I think the only high profile appearances he can get away with are attending relevant funerals. I'm pretty sure his appearance at Prince Philip's funeral last year was a very rare public appearance, and he had the advantage of all proceedings being within the perimeter of Windsor Castle's grounds during covid restrictions helping avoid unwanted attention. I expect him to attend the Queen's funeral when the time comes, and he'll have to hope that he can either get there covertly enough to avoid attention, and/or the public have enough respect for the Queen to override giving him public negative feelings. If Andrew wants to avoid public heckling/humiliation he'll keep his head down regardless of who's running the Royal family, and if this causes enough trouble for the police then they might even try to advise the Royals Andrew needs to keep quiet (although I doubt it would come to that).

If I was him and had the money left to sustain it, I'd consider de facto exile.

 

[43096]

I think his mother may well make him keep his head down as she is much wiser than him and seems to be just about the only person who has any influence on him. Whether Charles will be able to do anything when it is his turn will be interesting to see.

Charles wants a slimmed down monarchy, so the exits of Andrew, Harry and Meghan help in that regard. Given that, can't see those three coming back into "the firm" full time.

 

[david1212]

Andrew's time as an active member of the Royal Family / monarchy passed a point of no return when the Queen stripped him of all of his his honorary military roles and royal patronages. For the rest of his life he must now keep his head down not drawing media attention to him and his past. If he really can not understand this I suspect there will a lot of pressure and monitoring behind the scenes. Unless a desert island would exile help or would he think he could get away with more freedom?

What this does mean is the trial will now not be generating headlines in parallel with the Queen's Platinum Jubilee year plus privately for her no further stress and anxiety.

 

[birchesgreen]

What this does mean is the trial will now not be generating headlines in parallel with the Queen's Platinum Jubilee year plus privately for her no further stress and anxiety.

Big reason why it was settled i think.

 

[duncanp]

I am generally not in favour of cases like this, where people are accused of serious criminal offences (which require proof beyond all reasonable doubt for a conviction) but are tried in the civil courts (where the standard of proof is "on the balance of probabilities")

 

[Cowley]

So where does the money come from to pay for this settlement?
Do we have any idea what kind of money we’re even talking about for something like this?

 

[LOL The Irony]

So where does the money come from to pay for this settlement?
Do we have any idea what kind of money we’re even talking about for something like this?

He sold/is selling a chalet he owns to help cover costs.

 

[Cowley]

He sold/is selling a chalet he owns to help cover costs.

I was wondering if it was via property. Thanks for that.

 

[najaB]

Do we have any idea what kind of money we’re even talking about for something like this?

No, and we'll likely never know. I would expect it to be into seven figures though.

 

[birchesgreen]

So where does the money come from to pay for this settlement?
Do we have any idea what kind of money we’re even talking about for something like this?

Hopefully not from us

 

[Tester]

No, and we'll likely never know. I would expect it to be into seven figures though.

I have a sneaking feeling it will be eight figures - the proverbial 'offer you can't refuse'.

 

[LOL The Irony]

No, and we'll likely never know. I would expect it to be into seven figures though.

Hopefully not from us

I have a sneaking feeling it will be eight figures - the proverbial 'offer you can't refuse'.

The lawsuit was £6.7 million from what I saw in a google search and his chalet is worth £17 million, so that should cover things. And in case you're wondering, the chalet was a present, from Sarah I believe.

 

[SteveM70]

No, and we'll likely never know. I would expect it to be into seven figures though.

If it’s truly a substantial donation to the charity it’ll stick out like a sore thumb in their accounts

 

[Strathclyder]

I think the only high profile appearances he can get away with are attending relevant funerals. I'm pretty sure his appearance at Prince Philip's funeral last year was a very rare public appearance, and he had the advantage of all proceedings being within the perimeter of Windsor Castle's grounds during covid restrictions helping avoid unwanted attention. I expect him to attend the Queen's funeral when the time comes, and he'll have to hope that he can either get there covertly enough to avoid attention, and/or the public have enough respect for the Queen to override giving him public negative feelings. If Andrew wants to avoid public heckling/humiliation he'll keep his head down regardless of who's running the Royal family, and if this causes enough trouble for the police then they might even try to advise the Royals Andrew needs to keep quiet (although I doubt it would come to that).

If I was him and had the money left to sustain it, I'd consider de facto exile.

Yeah, relevent funerals and that's about it from now on as far as public appearances go. Though given his track record and even with the Queen's word in his ear, I'm still somewhat sceptical. He seems to have the same amount of self-awareness as a brick wall and even that seems to be rather generous on my part. As @Gloster notes, will interesting to see what happens going forward and with Charles' acscension to the throne in the future.

 

[najaB]

If it’s truly a substantial donation to the charity it’ll stick out like a sore thumb in their accounts

Not necessarily. They may treat it as an endowment-in-trust and only the interest would directly show up on the charity's books.

 

[brad465]

Yeah,relevent funerals and that's about it from now on as far as public appearances go. Though given his track record and even with the Queen's word in his ear, I'm still somewhat sceptical. He seems to have the same amount of self-awareness as a brick wall and even that seems to be rather generous on my part. As @Gloster notes, will interesting to see what happens going forward and with Charles' ascension to the throne in the future.

Maybe Charles et al. need to try and create some incentive to keep him quiet. If he was to run out of money some form of allowance might work, with any form of stepping out of line punishable by suspending/removing the allowance, although if that comes from taxpayer's money then I don't expect it to be popular. I certainly don't see Andrew being able to do anything to earn money without being seen in public.

There maybe things to learn from keeping the Duke of Windsor (as he was known post-abdication) out of trouble as much as possible.

I have a sneaking feeling it will be eight figures - the proverbial 'offer you can't refuse'.

The lawsuit was £6.7 million from what I saw in a google search and his chalet is worth £17 million, so that should cover things. And in case you're wondering, the chalet was a present, from Sarah I believe.

The Telegraph are reporting that the settlement is over £12 million, so yes 8 figures, and that the Queen will help pay, which if the public have any sense will go down like a lead balloon:

Tomorrow's Papers Today - UK Front Pages - Latest Newspaper Headlines

All of UK's Tomorrow's Front Pages ✅ Updated Daily between 7PM - 11pm ✅ The Mail, Express, Times, Guardian and many more Proudly supporting #buyapaper

www.tomorrowspapers.co.uk