You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.
You might need to refresh your page afterwards.
Sweating Now.
Andrew's lawyers hold 'emergency talks' over Maxwell verdict as experts warn socialite's conviction will raise questions over how much prince knew about his friend's 'debauched behaviour' - amid royal fears she will 'name names' to reduce jail term
Lawyers in the US believe the ninth in line to the British throne should now be 'quaking in his boots' as his old friend faces spending the rest of her life behind bars unless she flips and 'names names'. Experts also believe that the Duke of York's chances of defeating the legal action brought against him by Virginia Roberts Giuffre will now be even harder after Maxwell was found guilty by a New York jury last night. The 60-year-old British socialite was labelled a 'dangerous' predator as she was convicted of helping to entice vulnerable teenagers to Jeffrey Epstein 's homes for him to sexually abuse between 1994 and 2004. Miss Maxwell, a friend of Andrew's for many years who decided not to give evidence at her trial, could now try to cut a deal to reduce a sentence that would see her die in prison. Royal experts have said the Duke of York's reputation is now 'a busted flush' because of his friendship with billionaire paedophile Epstein and now-convicted sex trafficker Maxwell. Robert Jobson, author of Prince Philip's Century, told MailOnline: 'Whatever way you look at the Maxwell verdict it is not good news for the Duke of York. Not only has he admitted a judgement failure regarding his friendship with the dead convicted paedophile Epstein, but it is known that he also enjoyed a longer friendship with convicted sex trafficker Maxwell'. He added: ''At the moment this is a civil case again the Duke of York, but I am sure the authorities will be watching the developments in this case very closely. Unless he is cleared his position as a working royal representing the Queen going forward is untenable unless the Queen is prepared to bring the institution into disrepute.'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10355115/Ghislaine-Maxwells-child-sex-trafficking-conviction-doesnt-bode-Prince-Andrew.html
Lawyers in the US believe the ninth in line to the British throne should now be 'quaking in his boots' as his old friend faces spending the rest of her life behind bars unless she flips and 'names names'. Experts also believe that the Duke of York's chances of defeating the legal action brought against him by Virginia Roberts Giuffre will now be even harder after Maxwell was found guilty by a New York jury last night. The 60-year-old British socialite was labelled a 'dangerous' predator as she was convicted of helping to entice vulnerable teenagers to Jeffrey Epstein 's homes for him to sexually abuse between 1994 and 2004. Miss Maxwell, a friend of Andrew's for many years who decided not to give evidence at her trial, could now try to cut a deal to reduce a sentence that would see her die in prison. Royal experts have said the Duke of York's reputation is now 'a busted flush' because of his friendship with billionaire paedophile Epstein and now-convicted sex trafficker Maxwell. Robert Jobson, author of Prince Philip's Century, told MailOnline: 'Whatever way you look at the Maxwell verdict it is not good news for the Duke of York. Not only has he admitted a judgement failure regarding his friendship with the dead convicted paedophile Epstein, but it is known that he also enjoyed a longer friendship with convicted sex trafficker Maxwell'. He added: ''At the moment this is a civil case again the Duke of York, but I am sure the authorities will be watching the developments in this case very closely. Unless he is cleared his position as a working royal representing the Queen going forward is untenable unless the Queen is prepared to bring the institution into disrepute.'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10355115/Ghislaine-Maxwells-child-sex-trafficking-conviction-doesnt-bode-Prince-Andrew.html
Comments
NO SWEAT Prince Andrew’s claim he ‘can’t sweat’ is blasted by Dr Hilary on GMB
Prince Andrew claimed that he "can't sweat" in his catastrophic Newsnight interview
https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/10367149/prince-andrew-claim-medical-condition-sweating-rare-real/
Senior royal insiders say the idea Prince Andrew (inset, left, top and bottom right) could still return to public life, despite the swirling controversy around his friendship with paedophile Jeffrey Epstein (bottom right), must be quashed. The comments came as Andrew suffered two setbacks in his US sex case, admitting he has no proof over his infamous claim he cannot sweat and also seeing the judge throw out an attempt to stall the case. Lawyers for his accuser Miss Roberts (top right), who is suing the prince for damages in a New York civil case, have demanded he hand over evidence he does not perspire, as he said in a car crash Newsnight interview two years ago when denying her allegations.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10359529/Royal-staff-sleepwalked-Prince-Andrew-crisis-scared-stand-him.html
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2021/12/31/prince-andrews-accuser-asks-duke-submit-evidence-inability-sweat/
This action against Prince Andrew looks ridiculous. Please let me state from the outset that I am in no way condoning his actions, nor do I have adequate knowledge of New York Law. But these are my personal reasons why I detest this sort of action.
1. Forum shopping. This is something rather more common in the US than here, due to the 51 different sets of laws in the USA. Forum shopping is where 1 side looks at all the possible different locations where it might be possible to sue. And picking the 1 that gives them the most chance of the most money.
So here we have acts that allegedly happened about 21 years ago. To a woman who has lived in Australia for many years. In relation to acts allegedly carried out in New York, the US Virgin Isles, and the UK. The New York location was owned by someone who is now dead, unlike the UK one. The age of consent is not relevant-the age was 16 or 17 in the relevant jurisdictions. The key is certain New York Sex Trafficking Laws-which would be relatively easy to prove v Epstein/Maxwell. But Andrew is the 1 with the money and the title.
2. This action would not be likely to succeed in the UK, because if the 2009 settlement. In England, claims involving injury normally have to be brought within 3 years. When someone is under 18 at the time, that 3 years only begins to run when the person knew or should have known. But in 2009, when this person was about 26, she had instructed US lawyers. And agreed to accept $500,000 in settlement of her potential claims v Epstein and his associates. If she is unhappy about that settlement, she should be suing her Lawyers.
3. It really riles me when people expect to be able both to take the money and open the box. Not because of the Prince Andrews/Maxwells of this world. Because of the thousands of poor people who may now not be able to negotiate settlements in such cases without having to go to Court. Because somebody (and their Lawyers) are too greedy. Because there is no point someone offering to settle a case and pay money if the other side are able to both take the money and sue regardless.
Judge Judy sorts them out "My Neighbours Cat Meowed at my window " I want compensation for hurt feelings.
The Americans think it's a marvelous Justice System .. you can get away with Murder, but jailed for Life for hiring cleaning staff for your Boss.
To Late,