The new year begins even less well for Prince Andrew than the old one ended.
The guilty verdict against Ghislaine Maxwell in a court in New York last week made the son of Queen Elizabeth II the best-known friend of the human trafficker and confidante of the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
This Tuesday, Prince Andrew finds himself in front of a federal court in Manhattan, at least represented by his American lawyer Andrew Brettler.
In a lawsuit for damages, Epstein's and Maxwell's alleged victim Virginia Roberts Giuffre accused the Royal of having sexually abused her three times in 2001 when she was 17 years old - in London, Epstein's estate on Manhattan's posh Upper East Side and on the Caribbean island of Little St. James, while she was still alive of the finance manager also got into the talk as the "pedo island".
A sweaty prince
Attempts by his lawyers to fend off the hearing at the last minute, or at least postpone it, had been rejected by the court over the weekend. On behalf of his aristocratic client, lawyer Brettler invoked formalities. Since Prince Andrew lived in England and Roberts Giuffre in Australia, the lawyer warned in vain that the lawsuit should be dismissed. "The motion is just another tired attempt by the prince to evade legal action," accused Sigrid McCawley, lawyer for plaintiff Roberts Giuffre, at the sixty-one year old. The lawyer had previously indicated that she would name at least six witnesses who saw Prince Andrew and Roberts Giuffre together.
The aristocrat had assured the broadcaster BBC in autumn 2019 that he would not remember the thirty-eight-year-old today. In the interview, ridiculed as a PR catastrophe, the sweating of the royal during the supposed encounters with Roberts Giuffre was also discussed. While the American remembered a sweat-drenched prince in logs, he claimed that he did not sweat for "strange medical reasons". As reported by American media, Roberts Giuffres lawyers are said to have asked the defendant a few days ago to prove that he cannot sweat with a medical certificate.
The prince's lawyers, who resigned from all royal duties after the scandal about the interview and his connection to Epstein in May 2020, are now relying on an agreement from 2009. Epstein is said to have agreed with Roberts Giuffre at the time, for a certain amount to refrain from taking legal action against the financial manager and his friends, acquaintances and business partners.
The agreement also allegedly expressly excludes “royalty” from further claims for damages.
If the presiding judge Lewis Kaplan follows the interpretation, Prince Andrew could be spared new revelations.
If not, the royal is threatened with millions in damages in the civil trial planned for autumn.