Judge Denies Prince Andrew’s Motion to Dismiss Sexual Assault Lawsuit

A federal choose in New York has mentioned Virginia Giuffre’s civil case claiming Prince Andrew sexually assaulted her can proceed, denying a movement for dismissal Andrew’s protection crew argued Jan. 4 in courtroom. Judge Lewis Kaplan of New York’s Southern District mentioned Wednesday in his opinion that the language in a 2009 settlement between Giuffre and Jeffrey Epstein was ambiguous about whether or not it launched Andrew from authorized motion by Giuffre, and the case in opposition to Andrew might proceed.

The settlement settlement mentioned that Epstein and his legal professionals, workers, and different shut associates couldn’t be sued by Giuffre, and neither might “any other person or entity who could have been included as a potential defendant.” The choose zeroed in on that language, deciding it might be interpreted in a minimum of two other ways and noting that if the contract had been written extra clearly, this debate might be resolved, however because it was written the phrase is “far from self evident.”

The choose additionally acknowledged that Giuffre’s claims of battery and intentional infliction of emotional misery have been legally sound based mostly on her descriptions of compelled sexual contact within the grievance in opposition to Andrew. He additionally dominated that the protection’s argument in opposition to the constitutionality of the Covid-driven deadline extension on the statute of limitations for victims of childhood sexual abuse to sue in New York was with out advantage. “With or without a global pandemic, New York’s modest two-year revival window was a reasonable measure for remedying injustice to victims without treading upon the State Constitution’s due process clause,” Kaplan mentioned.

Andrew’s protection had additionally argued that Giuffre ought to be required to make extra particular allegations earlier than the case strikes forward. Kaplan denied this request, as effectively, noting that the regulation solely entitles somebody to extra readability when a declare is so obscure or ambiguous that the defendant can’t put together a response. “Ms. Giuffre’s grievance is neither ‘unintelligible’ nor ‘vague’ nor ‘ambiguous,’” he said, quoting the relevant case law. “It alleges discrete incidence of sexual abuse in particular circumstances at three identifiable locations. It identifies to whom it attributes that sexual abuse.” Andrew’s crew will get extra element in discovery, he added, and denied all elements of the protection’s movement for dismissal.

Giuffre’s 2021 lawsuit claims Epstein trafficked Giuffre to his longtime good friend Andrew for intercourse when she was 17, and that she obtained “express or implied threats” from Epstein, Maxwell, and/or Andrew to carry out sexual acts with the royal. 

Released to the general public early this year, the 2009 settlement documented that Epstein had paid Giuffre $500,000 to dismiss her declare that he had sexually abused her when she was a teen and had compelled her to have intercourse together with his highly effective buddies. It included no request for forgiveness on Epstein’s half and certain Giuffre to confidentiality concerning the cost. It additionally launched Epstein and a few of his associates from additional authorized motion by Giuffre.

Since the sex-trafficking conviction of Epstein’s former girlfriend and worker Ghislaine Maxwell — and since Epstein died by suicide in federal custody in 2019 — Giuffre’s case in opposition to Andrew has risen to public prominence as a subsequent step towards justice for victims of the sex-trafficking ring led by Epstein. After it was revealed a juror might have withheld details about a historical past of sexual abuse throughout jury choice, Maxwell’s protection crew has requested a brand new trial. Their movement is due on Jan. 19.

Back to top button