Royally Eschewed: Court Rejects Prince Andrew’s Motion to Dismiss Giuffre Lawsuit

Florida Southern District Court

Prince Andrew lost a major ruling in his litigation with Virginia Giuffre (née Roberts), who claims that the Duke of York sexually assaulted her as part of the sex trafficking crimes of the late Jeffrey Epstein. In his 46-page decision, Judge Lewis A Kaplan of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York adopted an extremely narrow reading of the settlement and eschewed the defense arguments on threshold barriers to any lawsuit. Kaplan declared the “defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint or for a more definite statement is denied in all respects.”

We discussed the novel arguments put forward by Prince Andrew, including a sweeping waiver of future claims by Giuffre in a settlement with Epstein. As we discussed earlier, the long-secret 2009 settlement contains a provision that would seem to favor Prince Andrew in seeking dismissal. In exchange for $500,000, Giuffre agreed not only to release Epstein from any liability but any “other defendants” associated with him. Giuffre agreed to “remise, release, acquit, satisfy, and forever discharge the said Second Parties and any other person or entity who could have been included as a potential defendant (‘Other Potential Defendants’) from all, and all manner of, action and actions” that she may bring, whether “state or federal.”

That is pretty sweeping and this ruling could create major appellate issues. Prince Andrew argued that he is clearly a “potential defendant” as defined by the agreement. Indeed, given his close relationship to Epstein, he was likely one of the figures in mind when Epstein sought the broad language.

Kaplan worked mightily to avoid that conclusion. He insisted that it is not clear that the 2009 settlement benefits Prince Andrew. He asked “what is a ‘potential defendant’ as distinguished from a ‘defendant’?”

It is hard to see how Prince Andrew is not a potential defendant under this sweeping argument.

The court, however, ruled that it is not clear that this agreement can be enforced by anyone other than Epstein, who is now dead. According to this logic, any limits on Giuffre died with him. Yet, that means that Giuffre accepted half a million dollars on the promise not to sue any potential defendants but will now be able to do precisely that in federal court.

I have no sympathy for Prince Andrew and the question of enforceability is a difficult one. However, this and other issues raised by his defense team are credible and likely to be raised on appeal.

 

59 thoughts on “Royally Eschewed: Court Rejects Prince Andrew’s Motion to Dismiss Giuffre Lawsuit”

  1. Two points and then I’m adding you to my list of Trumpists to ignore:

    1. The quotations you cited were made purposely to ridicule Karen’s gross and despicable accusation about my character. Here is another exchange to prove my point:

    I said:

    “Karen S sincerely asks:

    “Are you saying that you believe LGBTQ students should be allowed to read about sex acts with children and pedophiles?”

    I responded sarcastically by asking a question of my own:

    “Are you saying that you want to round up Leftists whom you loath and coral us into Extermination Camps?”

    If someone is outrageously accusing me of fostering pedophilia, I’m going to mock them by accusing them of, say, wanting to commit genocide. Tit for tat.

    Similarly, each time Olly smears me as an “American Marxist,” I retaliate by calling him an “American Nazi” just to see how he likes being so maligned. When you can’t reason with someone, all one can do is to give them a taste of their own medicine. Sad but true.

    That was the context of my “book burning” sarcasm. It was made facetiously. I’m glad I asked to see its full context in order to satisfy *myself* that I did not lie. Don’t tell me otherwise because you are wasting your time.

    2. I’m not going to waste *my* time debating with someone who *knows* that Trump is a liar but pretends that he is not.

    1. LOL, caught in your own web of deceit, again, Jeff…

      Funny thing is, I didn’t really think Trump was *all that* (he simply wasn’t Hilary) until folks of your political persuasion found it necessary to fabricate, whole cloth, lies about him beginning with Russian collision (in concert with the intelligence agencies, no less) and demonize his supporters (and, more generally, conservatives) using the Jan 6, 2020 insurrection hoax. He scares the bejesus out of ya’ll and, considering the disaster Ole Dementia Joe is, perhaps he should run for President again. Maybe he learned a few things — starting with who his real friends and actual enemies are…

      Normally, I’d observe that billionaires own both political parties — America is a heads the billionaires win, and tails the people lose kinda place — but since Trump scares the Republican establishment too, perhaps he deserves a second bite at the apple. Couldn’t be any worse than Brandon.

      It’s called populism, Jeff, not tyranny.

      1. Dear Spanky: the denial, refusal to see the truth and devotion to Trump is nothing short of amazing. What Trump IS has been well-established via decades of: 1. relying on his father to prop up various businesses while he promoted a phony image of a fabulously-wealthy self-made billionaire boy genius real estate developer; when the financial support ended due to Fred’s dementia and court-appointed guardian, that’s when the bankruptcies started; 2. literally thousands of lawsuits due to Trump refusing to pay for goods and services, forcing contractors and material suppliers to sue, and then running up litigation costs and forcing a settlement on more-favorable terms. Trump did this for years and years, and bragged that it made him a smart businessman; 3. Trump University–defrauding gullible people into believing that he could “teach” them how to be successful in real estate–$25 million settlement; 4. 3 failed marriages due to infidelity; I count the current marriage as a failure because he was bragging about grabbing womens’ genitalia at or near the time of Barron’s birth, plus consorting with a porn actress and nude models who were paid off by his “fixer”, now-disgraced attorney Michael Cohen. The only thing Trump ever succeeded at was “The Apprentice”, all based on the PR-created fake image of a fabulously-wealthy self-made billionaire. Why do you think Trump is fighting so hard to keep the public from knowing the truth about his finances as proven by his tax returns and other financial documents–he’s lied so much about his alleged “wealth”, and the records would prove this. The fact that so many gullible people are dazzled by someone whose sole success in life is a fake persona as a reality television host is truly shocking.

        No matter how many witnesses and how much evidence have been amassed to prove that Trump’s campaign provided insider polling information to Russian hackers to help him cheat in 2016, you still refuse to believe it, and instead buy into the Fox News/alt right trope that it was a “hoax”, even though former Republican Congressman Dan Coats, head of US Intelligence, says that it’s true. This is partly because you fell for the alt/right indoctrination not to trust mainstream media. Trump refused to cooperate with the Mueller investigation–why do you suppose this is, if he had nothing to hide? What about all of the guilty pleas and guilty verdicts? Are they hoaxes, too? You don’t see Trump’s public deference to Putin and siding with Putin and against U.S. Intelligence in Helsinki as dangerous, nor do you question why a US President would side with a murderous dictator over his own intelligence agencies. You are fact-immune, and that is truly scary and what makes Trump dangerous–his malignant narcissism, constant lying about everything, his lack of patriotism, thirst for power and glory, along with the alt-right media pounding out lies on a daily basis. You Trumpsters believe his lies, especially the Big Lie. It doesn’t matter how many recounts, failed court challenges or other evidence is adduced, you will continue to believe any and all lies Trump tells. How in the hell you can see the images from Jan. 6th and hear the “Stop the Steal” speeches, the exhortation to “fight like hell”, and “let’s hope Mike Pence does the right thing”, see the certified election results from all 50 states, the attempts to bully state election officials into stealing Biden votes, the failed attempt to bully Pence into violating the Constitution, the failed baseless lawsuits and still believe that Jan. 6 th is a “hoax” is stunning. How far up your arse is you head shoved, anyway? Why can’t you see that he’s nothing but a fat gasbag with malignant narcissism–the product of a life of privilege whose entire persona as a successful self-made billionaire is based on lies, cheating and bullying people and who only sought the presidency as a salve for his fragile ego that needs affirmation and attention?

        Trump does NOT represent American populism. The majority of the American people have ALWAYS rejected him: he lost the popular vote in 2016 to Hillary Clinton, he never broke a 50% approval rating in 4 years’ time, he was predicted by every single poll to lose in 2020, which he did, but he still won’t shut up or go away. Trump has proven that he has nothing of value to offer America: he trashed the successful economy inherited from Barak Obama, he deliberately lied about the pandemic, allowing it to get out of control, which is the reason why the dangerous variants have flourished, the effects of COVID on the economy are still being felt in supply-chain problems (due to factory slow downs and decreased consumer demand) and inflation, which always follows a recession. The Trump Recession was the worse since the Great Depression, but in previous recessions, we weren’t also trying to recover from a deadly pandemic; of course, alt/right media blame Biden for this instead of putting the blame where it belongs–on Trump. Trump is directly responsible for at least 130,000 unnecessary deaths due to lying about the dangers of COVID. The reason many Republicans (more than will say so publicly) and the majority of the American people are worried about him is his abililty to somehow dazzle people like you into believing lies, to overlook facts, to distrust science, to distrust mainstream meda and to distrust law enforcement. The fact that you are so proud of your gullibility and stupidity, shown by your posts in which you repeat the lies you got from alt/right media, is also something to worry about.

        1. Natacha,

          If and when Trump is prosecuted and convicted, they will not believe Trump is a criminal. They won’t believe it; they can’t believe it because if he goes down, they go down. They will never admit defeat. It will be the “The Lost Cause 2.0” I doubt even Turley will be able to persuade them that Trump’s conviction was righteous once found guilty by a jury and upheld on appeal. We will have to further marginalize these dead-enders. With any luck, they will start their own political party which will carry-on under the article of faith that the 2020 election was stolen and Trump is a political prisoner….

          1. Jeff: you are correct. While Republicans are hedging their bets, busily coming up with ways to gerrymander districts, passing laws to make it harder to vote, removing Democrats from local election board and replacing them with “team players” who will invalidate votes with no evidence whatsoever, and by not speaking out against The Big Lie, this is all to set the stage for getting the faithful to disbelieve Trump’s next loss, all so he can cheat his way back into office. If people are gullible and delusional enough to believe that Trump won in 2020, despite all of the polls, certified election results, failed lawsuit challenges, attempts to bully election officials and other irrefutable proof that he lost, then they’ll believe whatever lies Trump and the Republicans can come up with next time. This is what makes Trump dangerous: the ability to get a substantial number of gullible people to reject the truth and to believe in lies, to overlook the overwhelming proof of his incompetence and unfitness for office, the economic and public health disasters he caused and the never-ending efforts to shift blame to Biden for the economic and health problems we still face that are his fault.

            1. All too true. And what has Turley done to disabuse his followers about believing the lies that Trump tells? Turley only mentioned the “Big Lie” for the first time in one of his posts the other day. He did not disabuse his followers of their belief that the election was stolen. Instead, he stated only that the Democrats *claim* there is a Big Lie when in fact Turley knows that the election was NOT stolen.

              Turley has stated:

              “I did not vote for Trump, and I have regularly criticized him in columns and blog posts.”

              https://jonathanturley.org/2020/10/26/we-recently-discussed-how-vanderbilt-professor-and-historian-jon-meacham-gave-a-quiz-in-his-course-on-the-2020-election-in-which-students-were-asked-was-the-constitution-designed-to-perpetuat/

              However, Turley has never called Trump a “liar” though he did call him “a carnival snake charmer” in 2011. So it is clear that Turley does not respect Trump as a man, but he will not acknowledge publicly that he is a pathological liar! We know why- he will lose his job at Fox AND become persona non grata with the Congressional Republicans who employ him to be their useful liberal to make their arguments in Impeachments- a very lucrative gig I suspect.

              Turley will not preserve his reputation as an intellectually honest academic by his being critical of Trump on occasion and calling for his Congressional censure on account of 1/6. His profiting from the rage spewed at Fox and his hypocrisy in ignoring it damns him. Turley’s unforgivable sin is not what he says, but, rather, what he does not. The fact that 99% of his followers here are under the mistaken impression that he agrees with their attitudes demonstrates that he will not set them straight. Turley will not tell them the WHOLE truth, that is, he believed 10 years ago that the idea of Trump participating in politics was “obscene” and that belief has been proven so true.

            2. Have you not seen what Barack and his pal Eric Holder have been doing re gerrymandering? Take a look at some of the crazy districts drawn by them Dems. Nutso.

              Who cheats in elections? Democrats. Who cheats at counting votes? Democrats. Who tells the Big Lies? Democrats –and their media mouthpieces, of course.

              Every crisis going on in the country today – one year after Biden assumed the position — is Biden’s creation and responsibility. Suck it up and cope with the incompetent disaster you put in charge.

              Quit yer whining. You voted for this mess.

              PS Trump won in 2020. There is NO WAY any thinking rational person believes Joe Biden got 80 million votes. THAT is the Big Lie right there. Talk about evidence of cheating and election fraud — two words: Joe Biden.

  2. He’s a Prince… he’s a Prince.
    He’s a Prince all the way
    From his first cigarette…
    To his last dying day

  3. Perhaps not, but what I wrote is more informative than repeating the word “Trump” 9 times.

    1. No, Jeff, you’re a proven liar… who merely spews bile at Trump, Turley, and conservatives in general all over the blog.

      If you said the sky was blue, one would be well advised to go outside and see for themselves.

      If you had principles, I could respect that. A friend, a Democrat, had a birthday today. Another friend, a Republican, and I sang “Happy Birthday”, badly, in honor. I disagree politically, often, with both. But neither stoops to mischaracterizations, omissions of fact or outright falsehoods to support their contentions. You do.

      You’re a believer, Jeff. A fundamentalist. On the road to Democratic salvation and utopia. Or so you think.

      But you do not understand the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

        1. Just one example…

          Remember that time you accused Karen S of advocating “book burning” in one thread after you quoted her in another saying she was opposed to book burning? Here are the specific quotes, Jeff.
          — — —
          “While I do not condone burning any books, it is also quite clear that some material are inappropriate for children, and should be removed.” — Karen S, as quoted by JeffSilberman

          So do I, but Karen and the Radical Right want to burn books they don’t favor. — JeffSilberman
          — — —
          That’s a lie, Jeff.

          And this is a post from Nov. 12, 2021 about this issue:
          — — —
          Jeff defends child porn in schools:

          So do I, but Karen and the Radical Right want to burn books they don’t favor. — JeffSilberman

          By quoting J. Turley who apparently has not read the sexually explicit books being objected to… by school board members.

          I am not familiar with this book but I favor giving deference to schools on the inclusion of material in libraries. — JTurley

          No one here favors censorship for adults, or burning books, as Karen obviously stated, but children are NOT adults. Why mischaracterize her position, Jeff? Why lie about her?

          Why advocate exposing children to sexually explicit materials in public schools, Jeff? Have you no moral or ethical compass? Have you no shame? Have you no decency? Sexually explicit content has NO place in public schools.
          — — —

          1. First, I’m impressed you went to so much trouble on my account.

            Second, you have ripped these quotes out of their context! Can you please share the link where these quotes were taken so that I can fairly defend myself? As you know, I have contributed alot on this blog, I cannot recall the circumstances of this debate with Karen.

            I look forward to your refreshing my memory. Just out of curiosity, do you believe that I am a bigger liar than even Trump?

              1. Ok, thanks. I’ll take a look at this. But will you answer my question please- in your opinion, am I a bigger liar than even Trump?

                1. Prove a few Trump lies, without lying yourself or quoting other known liars, and I’ll consider answering your question.

  4. It’s sad that all you got is a gut reaction, Spanky, and nothing intelligent to say to contradict my comments.

      1. Dear Spanky: the following is an analysis of Hannity’s interview with Manafort, including FACTS underlying the Russia investigation:

        “You really — in many ways, you, Roger Stone, [George] Papadopoulos, General [Michael] Flynn and Carter Page, the president himself,” Hannity said, referring to various targets of the Russia investigation — “all of this stems from a false, phony narrative based on a false dossier and phony FISA warrants.”

        Nope. Wrong. Obviously and immediately wrong.

        Quickly: Papadopoulos was investigated after telling an Australian diplomat that he had heard that Russia had incriminating emails belonging to Hillary Clinton. He later admitted to lying to investigators about his interactions with a man apparently linked to Russian intelligence. Flynn was investigated after his conversations with Russia’s ambassador were collected by the National Security Agency. He later admitted to lying about those conversations. Stone was convicted by a jury on charges of lying to investigators and attempting to block testimony from another witness; his sentence was commuted by Trump.

        The line about the dossier — a reference to reports collected by an investigator named Christopher Steele — really applies only to Carter Page, who served as an adviser to Trump’s campaign. He had been on investigators’ radar for years and traveled to Russia in July 2016, during the campaign. Shortly after he resigned from Trump’s team following public scrutiny of his interactions with Russia, the government obtained a warrant to surveil him based in part on that dossier. This has been retconned into being the genesis of the Russia probe overall, as Hannity suggests here. That’s obvious nonsense but taken as an article of faith on the right.

        Of more importance here is that Manafort is perhaps the person least protected by this argument. He had worked on behalf of a pro-Russian political party in Ukraine for years and had been interviewed by the FBI twice even before joining Trump’s team. Once he gained his position with the 2016 campaign, generously working for free, he quickly began trying to figure out how to leverage the gig to repair his relationship with an oligarch close to Russian President Vladimir Putin. Manafort participated in the well-known meeting at Trump Tower in June 2016 with a Kremlin-linked attorney.

        Less well-known, but more substantially, he also handed over internal campaign polling to a longtime aide, Konstantin Kilimnik. A bipartisan Senate report released in 2020 identified Kilimnik as “a Russian intelligence officer.” Sanctions imposed by the Treasury Department last year included a reference to his having “provided the Russian Intelligence Services with sensitive information on polling and campaign strategy.” This, of course, was during a period when Russia was actively seeking to interfere in the election on Trump’s behalf.”

        Yes, you Trumpsters do take as “an article of faith” everything you hear on Fox and alt/right media. The Mueller investigation was NOT instigated by the so-called “Steele Dossier”, nor was it a “hoax’.

        1. Natacha,

          As much as I am disgusted in Turley’s selling out to Fox, the fact that these lying Trumpists cannot point to one single instance of Turley using the words “witch-hunt,” “fake news,” or “hoax” (which they often throw around) proves beyond doubt that he is not like them despite their fond hope that he is on their side. Turley has held Trump in the greatest contempt long before he became President. When I point out that fact here, no Trumpist responds because they don’t want to believe that Turley is a Never Trumper.

          1. Turley walks a fine line, and he does what many trial lawyers do: slant the way he says things in order to leave a false impression on people who aren’t sophisticated enough or well-enough informed to understand how their view of the facts is being manipulated, while ignoring bigger truths and not actually outright lying. He is paid to breathe credibility into things like the “Hunter Biden” scandal, the alleged bias of mainstream media, and to defend the Trump nominees to the SCOTUS. The end-game for his employer is to try to shove Trump back into office, as well as Republicans taking over Congress. This is why I have lost respect for Turley. Trump is dangerously incompetent and has cultivated a susbstantial following of starry-eyed disciples who will believe whatever lies he tells and who have been indoctrinated into not believing mainstream media, science and to distrust law enforcement. There are enough of these disciples that most Republicans, with a few notable exceptions, like Liz Cheney, who DO understand just how dangerous and incomptent Trump is, lack the patriotism and guts to honor their oath to support and defend the Constitution and speak truth to power. Trump DOES have power, but not because he earned it–he pandered to things like racism, misogyny, xenophobia and non college educated resentment of the successes of educated women and minorities. By all measures, Trump’s “presidency” was a diaster for America–one that wil take years to repair. No one, including Biden, can fix the economic and health crises caused by Trump’s incompetence in less than one year’s time, and Republicans have done everything possible to prevent Biden from succeeding. Trump’s media enablers constantly pound the message that problems with inflation, the supply chain and ongoing COVID infections are all Biden’s fault. Trump won’t shut up or go away. We are indeed in dangerous times now because so many Americans fall for the lies of a reality television performer and reject science, truth and patriotism and because a major political party refuses to speak against the lies of a malignant narcissist due to fear of losing the next election.

            1. Every “crisis” Biden is dealing with right now was CREATED by Biden. Let’s talk about the incompetent disaster we have in the White House and his even more incompetent cabinet.

              1. SO, you claim that Biden “created” the Trump Recession he was handed, the supply-chain problems that resulted from factories closing down, consumer demand going down due to unemployment and people forced to stay home, the Trump tariffs on imports that caused computer chip shortages, and the 10% unemployment rate (that is now down to 3.9%)? BTW: the GDP is the best since 1984, but don’t expect Hannity to tell you this. So, it’s Biden’s fault that something like 40% of Americans refuse to be vaccinated because they believe the lies that: 1. the vaccine is “experimental” and is really the cause of most COVID deaths, so health departments are lying by blaming COVID for deaths due to other causes; 2. the vaccine more dangerous than COVID; 3. Dr. Fauci, the CDC and the FDA are all in bed with Pfizer, Moderna and Johnson & Johnson, and so they’re all lying about the safety and efficacy of the vaccine? You blame all of this on Biden, instead of the fat narcissist who told us that “it’s just one person coming from China”; “15 cases will soon be 0 cases”, who refused to wear a mask and told so many other lies?

                1. “[Y]ou claim that Biden “created” the Trump Recession he was handed . . .”

                  At some point, the new coach has to take the blame for his team’s losses.

                  When might that point be?

            2. “Republicans have done everything possible to prevent Biden from succeeding”

              Really? Have they sought to IMPEACH Joe Biden yet?

              1. Did Joe Biden try to leverage aid to Ukraine, that was appropriated by Congress, by asking Ukraine to gin up fake claims of misconduct? Did Biden lie about a nonexistent “landslide victory” being “stolen” because the election was “rigged”, and then tell his followers to storm the Capitol after being unable to litigate or bully his way back into office?

                Trump never had any agenda, other than personal aggrandizement, adulation and attention. He accomplished nothing legislatively–other than tax cuts that mostly benefitted the wealthy. Biden got a bipartisan infrastructure bill passed in his first year, as well as a COVID relief package. Biden has done everything possible to get COVID under control, but ReTrumplicans and their media enablers constantly do everything possible to hamstring such efforts, such as encouraging the faithful to refuse vaccination, pushing Ivermectin and other unproven treatments, encouraging resistance wearing masks and taking other measures to help bring the pandemic under control. Republicans refuse to vote in favor of anything proposed by Biden, which means that they refuse to honor the will of the American people, the majority of whom voted in favor of Biden.

            3. Natacha,

              I agree 100%. But I hold out hope that Turley will not be able to avoid an irreparable break with his followers when Trump is put on trial which seems inevitable. Turley will have to defend the law against the Trumpists parroting Trump’s scream of “witch-hunt.” There will be no wiggle room for Turley to try placate his loyal followers when they will demand that he is either with them or against them. There will be no middle ground.

  5. It seems that Turley has milked the Epstein scandal for all its worth given the paltry 18 responses from his thousands of followers. I would hazard to guess that he would get a much greater reaction to his postings were he to focus his attention on Trump since the vast majority of his followers are rabid Trumpists. For instance, here is a story which they would find more compelling given their *personal* stake in Trump’s vindication:

    “Eric Trump says the Trump Organization has ‘assembled the best legal, ethical minds’ to thwart the NY attorney general’s ‘3rd-rate’ investigation.”

    https://www.businessinsider.com/eric-trump-assembled-best-legal-ethical-minds-tish-james-investigation-2022-1

    It’s revealing that Turley has largely avoided discussing the legal issues surrounding the several investigations into Trump, his organization and his associates. With regard to Steve Bannon being indicted for criminal contempt of Congress, Turley was quoted as saying:

    “Bannon does not have a viable executive-privilege argument to make. It’s hard to discern any credible argument he can make to a court.”

    https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/garland-vs-bannon-is-bidenism-vs-trumpism

    On the one hand, the truth is that Bannon does not have a legal leg on which to stand. On the other hand, blogging this fact would greatly upset the Trumpists here. Turley knows how to tell the truth, and he also knows how not to hurt his “blog family.” His problem now and in the future is that he does not know how to do both at the same time….

    1. Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump…

      Jeff knows nothing else. All Trump, all the time. No brain required. Just following orders.

    2. It seems that Turley has milked the Epstein scandal for all its worth given the paltry 18 responses

      You are an old fashioned retard.

      You are mentally challenged and incapable of engaging in informed discussion.

      Turley does not post to generate comments. This has been communicated lots of times, but retards cant learn.
      Turley does not examine scandals. He examines the legal and constitutional influence on the event. Another data point that screams retard. Note the opening paragraph concerning the, 46-page decision, of Judge Lewis A Kaplan. This is a legal blog, not the scandal sheets retards spend so much time perusing.

      Your obsession blinds you to facts. You only grasp the little nuggets of a post that tweak the small part of your brain that functions.

  6. Looks like the prince lost his seat in Epstein and Maxwell’s musical pedo game… Now that the music has stopped, a well-known someone must take a fall. Better to sacrifice a useless prince than a pervy billionaire or one of their expensive politicians.

  7. To play devil’s advocate, I wonder if Giuffre herself will be in legal jeopardy for convincing her friends to get involved with Ghislaine and Epstein. One of the most tragic aspects of trafficking is that so often these girls help lure other girls into the same fix they’re in.

  8. The major difference is really that Epstein and say Maxwell and no doubt others were in the trafficking business. Andrew was apparently a customer and possibly one who didn’t even pay.

  9. Who lifted the rug to sweep all the potential allegations under the preverbal Rug, were they aware of the enormity and class of all the possible defendants?
    Just one of many reasons it’s getting harder and harder to have faith in the judicial system in America.
    As what was said in ‘ABSCAM’, “Money talks and BS walks”

  10. Why are all references to Judge Lewis Kaplan ‘she’? ‘Her opinion’, ‘she insisted, ‘she asked’. Typos, I presume?

  11. I really want at least a few of these high profile degenerates to take a fall. What they did is inexcusable, and the short memories that seem to have completely forgotten ‘metoo’ when it isn’t being used against potential Conservative justices are short, indeed. The girls suffered all the same. Pretty despicable.

  12. Maybe the royals should stop taking PRIVATE JETS all over the world to chase skirts as they then harangue us to use less energy trying to exist.

  13. contracts 101. Third party beneficiaries can enforce a contract where they are a beneficiary. So if Andrew wasn’t – but there are pictures of him and her – who were the beneficiaries of the language quoted if not him? Judge Kaplan who has always been well regarded, has rendered the term meaningless contrary to well established contract law. Seems like Judge Kaplan is living proof of the old adage: if you want to be a dog you can always find a stick.

    1. Black Rock, your comment seems on point to me. Ralph below argues “what lawyer worth his law school tuition would allow a client to accept such an agreement”, an argument in search of a new case and a different column. It is immaterial what type of lawyer would accept such a deal, the point is that the plaintiff signed it and it sure seems to apply to the lousy prince.

      1. The other side of the coin is that if you want to clinch the deal and include people like the Prince, list him by name or at least by description sufficient to identify him. Release language is litigated all of the time, and the intention of the parties, as discerned from the wording of the contract, controls. Here’s an example: what if the Prince had a venereal disease and that Giuffre went into a hospital with vague symptoms, and the right tests and exams weren’t done, and what if she didn’t discover the medical mistakes until later on, after testing disclosed she was infertile. Is the wording of this agreement broad enough to release the doctor and hospital for their negligence? I doubt it. Was the Prince an employee or business associate of Epstein? No.

  14. We are seeing discussion about the Judge’s narrow interpretation of the Settlement Agreement and Prince Andrew’s challenge….but are seeing scant discussion re the overly broad wording of the Settlement itself.

    What Lawyer worth his Law School Tuition would allow a Client to accept such an argreement?

    A decent Lawyer would have worked to limit the Settlement to Epstein himself alone…..and not include the entire rest of the known World as that Agreement seems to have done.

    I would like for Professor Turley to put on a different Hat and argue for the Plaintiff (being the highly skilled and well qualified Lawyer that he is…..that is well within his abilities).

    Would Professor Turley have counseled his Client to accept the Settlement that she did?

    If I were the Plaintiff I would be seeking a Lawyer of Professor Turley’s caliber to sue my. former Legal Counsel for a failure to provide adequate representation.

  15. It takes two to tango.

    I don’t see a gun to her head.

    Got perspective?
    ______________

    “Now, I have to go back to work on my State of the Union speech. And I worked on it until pretty late last night. But I want to say one thing to the American people. I want you to listen to me. I’m going to say this again: I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky. I never told anybody to lie, not a single time; never. These allegations are false. And I need to go back to work for the American people. Thank you.”

    – William Jefferson Clinton
    _____________________

    – Eileen Wellstone – age 19 – (1969) Allegation: Sexual assault

    – Anonymous female student at Yale University (1972) Allegation: Sexual assault

    – Anonymous female student at the University of Arkansas (1974) Allegation: Sexual assault

    – Anonymous female lawyer (1977) Allegation: Sexual assault

    – Juanita Broaddrick (1978) Allegation: Rape

    – Carolyn Moffet (1979) Allegation: Sexual assault

    – Elizabeth Ward (1983) Allegation: Unclear

    – Sally Perdue (1983) Allegation: Unclear

    – Paula Jones (1991) Allegation: Sexual harassment

    – Sandra Allen James (1991) Allegation: Sexual assault

    – Christy Zercher (1992) Allegation: Sexual assault

    – Kathleen Willey (1993) Allegation: Sexual assault

  16. The Windsor men are not known as brainiacs and are often ruled by their schwanze.

    Witness the Duke of Windsor, Charles, and Harry.

    Andrew is just another Windsor caught in the trap.

  17. The plaintiff must be asked a simple question to end this interpretive battle which will be brewing soon enough: “When you agreed to accept 1/2 million US Dollars to settle your issue with Mr. Epstein, exactly who else did you mean to include as the other defendants and potential defendants?” And who did you intend to exclude. Neither the Court nor a Judge are in any position to know what the plaintiff intended when she accepted the money.

Leave a Reply