Prince Andrew’s ‘arrogance’ prevented earlier
settlement, lawyers say
Attorneys for victims of Jeffrey Epstein hail victory
for sexual abuse survivors but say case should have been settled sooner
Richard
Luscombe in Miami and Dani Anguiano in Los Angeles
Tue 15 Feb
2022 20.41 GMT
US
attorneys representing victims of Jeffrey Epstein have hailed Tuesday’s
settlement between Prince Andrew and Virginia Giuffre as a “victory” for
survivors, with one claiming the royal’s “arrogance” stood in the way of
settling sooner.
Giuffre
filed a civil lawsuit against the Duke of York in New York last year, accusing
the prince of sexually abusing her when she was 17. The move represents a
remarkable turnaround for the duke, who has always denied having a sexual
relationship with Giuffre and had vowed to clear his name in court.
In the
settlement, the prince said he regretted his association with Epstein, who
killed himself in prison in 2019 while facing trial for sex crimes.
“It’s
another banner day for the survivors,” Robert Lewis, a New York-based lawyer
for Sarah Ransome, who was abused at the age of 22 and settled a lawsuit with
Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell in 2018, told the Guardian.
He said he
felt the victims had “been heard, and were no longer silenced” after Maxwell,
the disgraced British socialite, was convicted in December on charges of
recruiting and grooming teenage girls for sexual encounters with Epstein
between 1994 and 2004, but he said Tuesday’s developments would further empower
them.
“They
understand the pain and suffering that other survivors have gone through and
they’re happy to see other survivors get some vindication, whether it’s the
money paid or even more importantly just an acknowledgement that their claims
are legitimate, that they’ve been wronged and that the truth is out.”
Lisa Bloom,
attorney for several of Epstein’s victims, said in a tweet that Giuffre had
achieved “what no one else could: getting Prince Andrew to stop his nonsense
and side with sexual abuse victims”.
“My clients
and I see this as a monumental victory for Virginia and are just in awe of her
courage,” Bloom told the Guardian. “She stood up … she did it not only for
herself but for other victims. It’s really an inspiration.”
Bloom said
cases such as these where “everyday people can stand up and get justice”
provided hope to other victims. “Every time there’s a victory for somebody like
this it goes a long way toward inspiring victims to stand up and stick with the
fight,” she added.
Settlement
money, which Bloom said surely amounted to millions of dollars, would go toward
Guiffre’s charity and support victims who haven’t received news coverage and
don’t have a celebrity name attached to their cases, she said.
However,
Lewis said he was surprised the prince had not settled the case sooner. Asked
if there had been “any element of arrogance” in the prince’s delay in settling,
Lewis said: “That’s absolutely the case.”
“It’s true
for Epstein, it’s true for Maxwell, it’s true for the Catholic church, it’s
true for the prince … they think the law on some level applies only to
everybody else.
“The
settlement does not surprise me. What does surprise me is that he and his
advisers and lawyers didn’t see this earlier and come to terms with it much
earlier.”
The court
document that revealed news of the settlement on Tuesday said: “Prince Andrew
has never intended to malign Ms Giuffre’s character, and he accepts that she
has suffered both as an established victim of abuse and as a result of unfair
public attacks.”
However,
Lewis said he believes the royal’s previous conduct, from his claim of not
remembering meeting Giuffre to denouncing her allegations as “baseless” has
been questionable.
“What I
observed, and what the world observed, was that for the last however many years
he’s been dodging the whole matter. He sat for that terrible [Newsnight]
interview in 2019, that didn’t come off well at all. Then they fought
jurisdiction in New York and lost, and moved to dismiss, and lost.
“So he was
a couple of weeks from being deposed and having to answer questions under oath
to lawyers, who had a lot more information about the situation than journalists
did.
“Given
that, and the further diminution in his public standing, which is obviously
important to him, it was a good time for him to settle.”
Bloom said
the settlement means the royal would not “malign [Giuffre] any more”.
“Folks need
to understand how extraordinarily difficult and painful it is to litigate a
sexual abuse case, and Virginia has shown more courage in one day than most of
us show in an entire lifetime, by not only going after Jeffrey Epstein and
Ghislaine Maxwell, but now Prince Andrew, and standing up to him,” Bloom saidin
an interview with Talk Radio.
“Part of
this settlement is acknowledging her pain and what she has gone through, and
that he did not intend to malign her character. He’s not going to malign her
any more.
“He states
publicly that he regrets his association with Jeffrey Epstein, which frankly,
he should have said a long time ago. These are good accomplishments. It would
have been nice for all of us to see this trial … but at the end of the day
Virginia gets to decide what’s best for her. She does not have to carry the
weight of the world’s interest.”
Prince
Andrew’s settlement raises many questions but answers none
Analysis: the Queen’s support has been clear but the
court of public opinion is unlikely to exonerate the Duke of York
Caroline
Davies
Tue 15 Feb
2022 19.41 GMT
News of the
Duke of York’s settlement was met with silence by Buckingham Palace. There was
no official comment from the Queen, who just last month sought to distance the
monarchy as an institution from the fallout over her second son’s legal woes.
But it is
understood that the very decisive action taken by the Queen last month, when
she stripped Prince Andrew of his royal patronages, honorary military titles
and any official use of his HRH title, still stands firm.
Indeed, it
would be hard to imagine a return to royal duties and public engagements given
that the out-of-court settlement announced on Tuesday raises many questions,
but answers none.
Andrew does
not, in the statement, dispute the very serious allegation of sexual assault
put by Virginia Giuffre in her civil case. Nor does he admit it.
His lawyer
had previously in court dismissed the case as “baseless” and accused Giuffre,
who settled her claim against Jeffrey Epstein for $500,000 in 2009, of seeking
another “payday”. The announcement of the settlement is unlikely to exonerate
Andrew in the court of public opinion.
So, his
patronages are very unlikely to be returned to him – indeed, they are already
being shared out among other members of the royal family. He will remain
sidelined in any official royal capacity.
Yet he is
the Queen’s son. In the three years since Giuffre dropped her legal bombshell,
the Queen has made clear her support through her actions. Andrew has been
invited to Balmoral. The Queen allowed him to play a prominent part in the
public tributes to the Duke of Edinburgh after his death last April. She and
Andrew have been riding together.
And it is
possible we will see him during her platinum jubilee celebrations in June, as a
member of her family.
Andrew now
faces paying a hefty bill in legal costs and an undisclosed sum that could run
into millions. One unconfirmed report put it at £7.5m, while lawyers said it
could exceed £10m.
It is not
known if the Queen, who supported Andrew’s royal work from the private income
she receives from the Duchy of Lancaster estate, will be contributing to his
costs and settlement. Andrew recently sold a Swiss ski chalet that he bought in
2014 with his ex-wife Sarah Ferguson for a reported £18m.
Royal and
legal experts hailed the settlement as good news for the institution, if not
for Andrew. David McClure, an author on royal finances, tweeted: “This was
always the only outcome for the royal family in terms of damage limitation.”
Nick
Goldstone, a lawyer with the disputes resolution firm Ince, said of the
out-of-court settlement: “A good day for the royal family. A huge relief for
that institution. Probably a good day for Ms Giuffre and a recognition of the
impossible position Prince Andrew was in and the cessation of hostilities.”
He said: “A
‘settlement in principle’ needs to be ratified by court order and until we see
that, I would not hold your breath. Clearly this is a settlement on very
generous financial terms for the complainant and a degree of back pedalling by
the defendant.
“In terms
of ‘the court of public opinion’, this looks likes an admission of bad conduct
on the part of Andrew and I suspect he will remain ‘off-stage’ from the royal
family for the rest of his life. Perhaps he intends to rehabilitate himself by
supporting the fight against the evils of sex trafficking and supporting its
victims over the years. What appears to have truly motivated him has been his
loss of honorary title and royal associations.”
The
settlement was announced weeks before Andrew was scheduled to give a deposition
in the case under oath to Giuffre’s lawyers.
The
statement marks a change of tone from Andrew compared with his infamous
Newsnight interview with Emily Maitlis in 2019, during which he failed to
express sympathy for Epstein’s victims.
The court
document states that Andrew “regrets his association with Epstein, and commends
the bravery of Giuffre and other survivors in standing up for themselves and
others”.
The royal
author Penny Junor said: “At last he’s expressing some regret and some empathy
for those girls.” The Newsnight interview had been “all about him” she said.
“He’s got it right now, it took him a long time to get there but I think he’s
got it right.”
Asked if
there was a way back to public royal life for the prince, she replied: “I think
it’s very, very unlikely.”
Andrew
would be “for ever tainted”, said Joe Little, the editor of Majesty magazine.
“I just don’t think he’s ever likely to resume work as a working member of the
royal family. I think that too much water has gone under the bridge for that
and the institution of monarchy has been tainted by his association with
Epstein and I just think that there’s no going back on all that.”
Of the
likely reaction of the rest of the royal family, he said: “I’m sure that they’re
glad this [settlement agreement] has happened, but does it exonerate the prince
who really has not been charged with anything criminal? He will, I think, for
ever be tainted by this scandal, for want of a better way of describing it.”
No comments:
Post a Comment