NY - Ghislaine Maxwell, Jeffrey Epstein confidante, arrested on Sex Abuse charges, July 2020 #2

[Chelly]

dp...sorry.

 

[Chelly]

@ellievhall
·
26m

The Duke's lawyer Andrew Brettler argued that his client hadn't been properly served because Giuffre's lawyers were the one to serve him with the lawsuit aka it didn't go through diplomatic or judicial channels as outlined by the Hague Convention: https://hcch.net/en/instruments/conventions/full-text/?cid=17

@ellievhall
·
20m

Giuffre's lawyer David Boies countered that they did in fact follow the Hague Convention when they served Prince Andrew with the lawsuit, specifically Article 10: https://courts.ca.gov/partners/documents/ea_HagueService.pdf

@ellievhall
·
9m

HOWEVER, Judge Kaplan said that the Hague Convention is "optional" in this case because of US federal law concerning serving individuals in a foreign country. Specifically Rule 4(f)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure: https://law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_4…

Legalese is way above my pay grade. So, all I can say is kudos to Judge Kaplan and The Hague.

 

[Dotta]

https://www-dailymail-co-uk.cdn.amp...ew-evidence-lawsuit-continues-dodge-duck.html
Interesting

 

[sds71]

@RE_DailyMail

New: The High Court has confirmed it has accepted a request for service under The Hague Convention from Virginia Giuffre's lawyers and can now proceed with the process of contacting the Duke of York about her civil action as requested by a judge in the US on Monday

 

[Dotta]

High Court in London accepts request from Virginia Giuffre's lawyers | Daily Mail Online

 

[tayaway]

High Court in London accepts request from Virginia Giuffre's lawyers | Daily Mail Online

The DM used the Tweedledee and Tweedledum photo again!

 

[Dotta]

The DM used the Tweedledee and Tweedledum photo again!

Ha ha I have no idea who those characters are but I get the gist!

 

[Kemug]

I must say they look like 2 happy, confident consenting adults to me.

 

[sds71]

@RE_DailyMail
·
Developments in the Guiffre v Prince Andrew action. His team does not accept the High Court has been correctly asked to serve papers - a hearing may be needed in the UK to determine it. Guiffre team riposte it ‘is not intended to be a game of hide and seek behind palace walls’.

They further argue: ‘Prince Andrew should not be permitted to avoid and impede service while at the same time actively building his affirmative defenses to this matter.’

 

[Legally Bland]

Email from UK High Court accepting arrangement of service.
#15, Att. #18 in Giuffre v. Prince Andrew (S.D.N.Y., 1:21-cv-06702) – CourtListener.com

Email from A's solicitors objecting to service.
#15, Att. #19 in Giuffre v. Prince Andrew (S.D.N.Y., 1:21-cv-06702) – CourtListener.com

Email from High Court in response to A's objection.
#15, Att. #20 in Giuffre v. Prince Andrew (S.D.N.Y., 1:21-cv-06702) – CourtListener.com

Link for docs index:
Docket for Giuffre v. Prince Andrew, 1:21-cv-06702 - CourtListener.com

 

[Dotta]

Prince Andrew challenges a High Court ruling that he can be served with papers over his US sex case | Daily Mail Online
Straight to the comments

 

[Legally Bland]

Prince Andrew can request the unsealing of a 2009 settlement agreement that his lawyer claims protects him from a lawsuit alleging he sexually assaulted a girl two decades ago, a US judge in New York has said.

Judge Loretta Preska in Manhattan said in a written order on Thursday that the prince could seek the information to support arguments that the agreement between Virginia Giuffre and Jeffrey Epstein disallows her lawsuit against the prince.

[...]

The judge referenced the prince in an order rejecting the attorney Alan Dershowitz’s attempt to unseal “a settlement agreement” that was designated confidential and sealed as part of records in the lawsuit Giuffre brought against Maxwell.

The judge said Dershowitz, who claimed he was seeking the unsealing “as a matter of professional ethics” because he believed Giuffre’s claims in the lawsuit against the prince were barred by the settlement, could not seek the records because he was not a party to the lawsuit against Andrew.

“To the Court’s knowledge, Mr Dershowitz has not been commissioned as a roving ethics monitor,” Preska wrote.

“The Court notes, however, that parties who have standing … and perhaps Prince Andrew, who has not been heard from … may seek to lift the protective order for valid reasons,” she added.

Prince Andrew can request unsealing of 2009 Epstein settlement, judge says

 

[tayaway]

Prince Andrew can request the unsealing of a 2009 settlement agreement that his lawyer claims protects him from a lawsuit alleging he sexually assaulted a girl two decades ago, a US judge in New York has said.

Judge Loretta Preska in Manhattan said in a written order on Thursday that the prince could seek the information to support arguments that the agreement between Virginia Giuffre and Jeffrey Epstein disallows her lawsuit against the prince.

[...]

The judge referenced the prince in an order rejecting the attorney Alan Dershowitz’s attempt to unseal “a settlement agreement” that was designated confidential and sealed as part of records in the lawsuit Giuffre brought against Maxwell.

The judge said Dershowitz, who claimed he was seeking the unsealing “as a matter of professional ethics” because he believed Giuffre’s claims in the lawsuit against the prince were barred by the settlement, could not seek the records because he was not a party to the lawsuit against Andrew.

“To the Court’s knowledge, Mr Dershowitz has not been commissioned as a roving ethics monitor,” Preska wrote.

“The Court notes, however, that parties who have standing … and perhaps Prince Andrew, who has not been heard from … may seek to lift the protective order for valid reasons,” she added.

Prince Andrew can request unsealing of 2009 Epstein settlement, judge says

Ok, let me see if I got this right. The judge denied AD's request to unseal the doc't. If POI PA wants to initiate the process, he can. Ya?

 

[RickshawFan]

I am no fan of Andrew's, but I do think this case isn't really fair on him. Virginia was young, yes, but she didn't look like a child to me. How was Andrew meant to know how old she was? Virginia and JE knew - so it could be said that they were conspiring against Andrew, even though she was unwilling.

I'm not sure it matters how old Virginia looked. If she was underage, she was underage. That's a crime.
I also think the idea that Virginia looked older than she was, makes her seem less of a victim, and PA less of a perpetrator. A victim is a victim in a crime like this: there aren't degrees of victimhood for non-consensual sex IMO.

 

[RickshawFan]

Just because a witness claims that he saw PA groping VRG at the poolside does not prove that they ever had a sexual relationship. What does the witness mean by "groping"? What type of "groping" could be done at the poolside. Apparently this witness is a disgruntled ex-employee so his evidence could be considered suspicious. The only person who could verify whether PA and VGR ever had sex would be GM.

PA has lied and this is now his problem. Did his lawyers advise him to deny everything? If I had been his lawyer, I would have advised him not to deny that he had been in VGR's company but that they had never had sex.

Are you saying "groping" a minor isn't a sexual assault? I believe it would be; there's no consent because the teenager in question is a minor.

 

[Dotta]

I just cant understand why - if he had access to multiple GROWN UP willing women - he decided to have sexual relationship with a MINOR???? He knew perfectly well how old WG was.

 

[Dotta]

US judge deals blow to Prince Andrew's bid to dodge being served his sex abuse case legal papers | Daily Mail Online
Another episode!
DM is like a dog with a bone with this topic
I know it isnt appropriate, but... I have bouts of giggles reading the comments

 

[tayaway]

Oh yes, I fully understand that V is a victim. But I'm not sure that PA is a perpetrator. He is not noted for his intellect and understanding, which is not his fault. I think that it is "what you see is what you get" with him. And he obviously saw a willing young woman. I actually think it is pretty cruel of her to now accuse him of rape. She did not say to him at the time "please stop, I don't want this." If she had we would know. I suppose this may be called victim-blaming, but I think we have to consider the facts.

Fact: POI PA hung out with pedo JE and continued to hang out with him after his conviction and jail time. Fact: POI PA is a wealthy member of a powerful royal family and is used to getting his way. Fact: He treats his staff like . Fact: People like him and his buddy GM think of commoners as disposable garbage. Both GM and JE have spoken to this. Fact: Even at the ripe old age of 61, he's a spoiled little mummy's boy. Fact: Yes, it's victim blaming.

 

[Dotta]

Fact: POI PA hung out with pedo JE and continued to hang out with him after his conviction and jail time. Fact: POI PA is a wealthy member of a powerful royal family and is used to getting his way. Fact: He treats his staff like ****. Fact: People like him and his buddy GM think of commoners as disposable garbage. Both GM and JE have spoken to this. Fact: Even at the ripe old age of 61, he's a spoiled little mummy's boy. Fact: Yes, it's victim blaming.

Where were his advisers, cousellors, etc?
Why did they let him run loose?

 

[tayaway]

Where were his advisers, cousellors, etc?
Why did they let him run loose?

I dunno, maybe for the same reason they let him loose to do that infamous interview?