Today, Prince Andrew was seen hiding after his lawyers filed a blistering 36 page motion to dismiss a US civil suit against him.
The 61-year old royal was seen driving a Range Rover close to Windsor Castle while wearing a maroon jumper. It is emblazoned in the crest of Grenadier Guards.
Despite being accused of sexual assault, the Duke of York was able to retain his honorary position as colonel of an elite infantry unit.
After Virginia Giuffre filed a US civil suit against him, his legal team moved to dismiss it.
The 38-year-old was previously known by her maiden name Roberts. She claims she was sex ped to Prince Andrew on three occasions by Jeffrey Epstein (convicted paedophile), the first time she was 17.
The Duke has denied her claims repeatedly and vehemently.
The royal was seen driving in a Range Rover near Windsor Castle while wearing a maroon-coloured jumper with the Grenadier Guards’ crest.
Giuffre (right alongside Andrew), was one of Epstein’s most vocal accusers. She claimed that she was forced to sex in order to get with the Duke. She has claimed since childhood that she was a victim Epstein’s sex trading ring in the early 2000s, when she was just a teenager (Ghislaine pictured left).
The 38-year-old woman, previously known as Roberts her maiden name, claims that she was sex ped to Andrew on three occasions by Jeffrey Epstein (pictured), the second time when she turned 17
Prince Andrew’s legal team has filed legal papers against his accuser in the US over her claims of being abused.
The papers claim to expose Ms Giuffre’s ‘sex kitten’ past and accuse her of procuring ‘slutty girls’ for Epstein – who died in prison in 2019 while awaiting trial on federal sex trafficking charges.
Andrew’s US legal team labelled Ms Giuffre’s lawsuit frivolous in court documents filed Friday night. They stated that she had initiated the baseless lawsuit against Prince Andrew in order to make another profit at his expense.
They said she had profited for years from her association to Epstein, the convicted sexual offender, and was willing to milk the publicity’ for as many years as she could, but that she had not kept her stories straight.
Lawyers also cited a story published in the New York Daily News in 2015 that claimed Giuffre recruited young women into Epstein’s sex trafficking ring and referenced former friends who had described her as a ‘money-hungry sex kitten’ who enjoyed a lavish lifestyle.
Prince Andrew (left), has hit back at Virginia Giuffre’s (right), ‘frivolous, sex-assault litigation. She claims she’s just out to get a payday’ in a shock move he filed to dismiss his claims on Friday
In a section of the legal papers headed ‘Giuffre’s role in Epstein’s criminal enterprise’, lawyers cite Crystal Figueroa, the sister of one of Giuffre’s ex-boyfriends, who claims she was asked by Ms Giuffre for help in recruiting underage girls.
The quote is: “She [Giuffre]I’d say to you, ‘Does anyone know any girls that are kind of slutty’
The court filing added: “It is striking that while lurid claims are made against Prince Andrew and Giuffre,” Giuffre herself is the only party to this claim. Her conduct has involved the wilful recruit and trafficking young girls for sexual abuse.
In the New York Daily News article, which is cited in Prince Andrew’s response, one of Giuffre’s ex-lovers who would drive her to Epstein’s Palm Beach mansion told the news site: ‘She was like head b****.
“She would have like nine to 10 girls she used bring to him. She didn’t look like she was being held prisoner…
“She and the other girl would walk out smiling, with their little bathing suits on. It was like they had just come off the beach. She’d like to have four grand.
Prince Andrew fiercely denied Giuffre’s claims in the motion he filed in US District Court in Manhattan on Friday. He called her claims ‘baseless’ in an effort to ‘achieve another payday’ before slamming Giuffre for her allegations against Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell
The motion cited a 2015 shocking story that revealed that Giuffre (right), had been trained to recruit other young women into Epstein’s sex trafficking ring.
“And then, I’d take them all the way to the mall and they would get their nails done.”
Giuffre was settling a lawsuit against Epstein in March 2015. The publication claimed that former friends claimed she was more of a sex-hungry kitten who lived lavishly than someone who was enslaved and abused by Epstein.
Andrew’s lawyers replied that Virginia Giuffre might be a victim of Jeffrey Epstein’s sexual abuse. Nothing can excuse or fully capture Epstein’s abhorrent and grave behavior against Giuffre if so.
‘But, and without diminishing any harm suffered as a result of Epstein’s alleged misconduct. Prince Andrew never sexually abused, or assaulted Giuffre.
“He unambiguously denies Giuffre’s false allegations against his character.”
Andrew Brettler, Andrew’s attorney, believes that an agreement between Epstein & Giuffre in 2009 exonerates Andrew from any responsibility in the lawsuit that he called ‘baseless.
According to court documents, Giuffre had profited from Epstein’s allegations and others by selling stories, photographs and secret agreements to settle her claims against Epstein and his ex, Ghislaine Maxwell.
It also states: “Epstein’s abuses against Giuffre don’t justify her public campaign to defeat Prince Andrew.”
The motion stated that her “pattern” of filing lawsuits against a number of high-profile people should be stopped as it continues to irreparably damage many innocent people.
“Most people can only dream of obtaining such large sums of money as Giuffre has secured over the years,” the legal papers stated. They also noted that the money could be a ‘compelling motivation for Giuffre’ to continue filing frivolous lawsuits against individuals like Prince Andrew.
According to court documents, Giuffre created a media frenzy that led to’sensationalism’ and ‘innuendo (to), prevailing over the truth’.
Giuffre is one of Epstein’s most outspoken accusers. She claims that she was a victim in Epstein’s sex trafficking ring when she was just a teenager.
Giuffre’s lawyer, Sigrid McCawley told the Sunday Times yesterday: ‘If Virginia Giuffre had stood silent in the face of outrageous statements like those Prince Andrew routinely churns out — his motion to dismiss the litigation being no exception — the decades-long sex-trafficking ring his friend Jeffrey Epstein operated and he participated in would have never been exposed.
“On the subject money, let’s be very clear: Prince Andrew is the only party to this lawsuit that uses money to his advantage.”
Andrew has repeatedly denied having sex or meeting Roberts, despite a photograph of them together.
The court papers were a scandal to women’s groups, campaigners and activists. Andrew’s lawyers claimed that Ms Giuffre had obtained sums’most people can only dream of’ by filing lawsuits in court against Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. These cases were eventually settled out of court.
Joan Smith, a former chairwoman of the Mayor’s Violence Against Women group in London, said that the Duke seems to live in the 1950s, when abused females were often called “gold diggers”. The lowest level of accusation of a victim of sexual abuse of being motivated financially is possible.
“It’s victim shaming and further evidence for his appalling judgment. Andrew is just dragging himself further into the gutter.
Karen Ingala Smith is the chief executive of NIA. NIA is a London-based charity that works to end domestic and sexual violence against women.
“It is grossly dishonest for one to claim that sexual violence is abhorrent, and then on the contrary to label those seeking legal redress in such a way as money grabers.”
Ms Giuffre’s lawyer said last night that she might subpoena Andrew’s ex-wife Sarah Ferguson, and her daughters Princesses Beatrice & Eugenie, and force them to testify in court.
The Duke of York (pictured Thursday) was subject to immediate backlash by women’s groups after his lawyers filed an intense 36-page motion for dismissal of the US civil suit brought forward by Ms Giuffre. In it, she accuses Royal of rape
Sigrid McCawley, along with her team, are examining Andrew’s 2019 BBC Newsnight interview featuring Emily Maitlis to find ‘inconsistencies.
She would like to question Andrew’s ex-wife, and daughters, about his alibi.
Ms Giuffre may also ask for the Duke’s medical records. After he claimed he couldn’t have been’sweating profusely” on a dance floor as Ms Giuffre claimed because he suffers from a medical condition that prevents him from perspiring, Ms Giuffre said Ms Giuffre could also request his medical records.
According to a legal source familiar with the matter, the Mail reported Sunday that Andrew and his team were not looking to victim shame their accuser. This could backfire in the court of public opinions.
Wednesday in New York will see the first pre-trial hearing.
A source close enough to Prince Andrew, 61 said last night: “He has utter sympathy with all and any women who have been victims of attacks. But he has been accused himself of the most horrible crime and he insists that he is innocent. He has been silent for too long, and his accuser has made vitriolous and unproven accusations against him.
“So, guess what? He is fighting back with all of his might to attain justice in the courts as well as in the court for public opinion. He is saddened by the fact that the legal fight is so personal. But, this was not something he started. He is fighting for the best of his life.
“His lawyer is only pointing out documents that are part of the evidence which will determine whether his accuser was truthful, convincing or lacking. Andrew doesn’t like the way things have been revealed about him and the comments made about him. But his lawyers want everything to show that he’s innocent.
The prince’s friend said that it was an affront against natural justice that someone can be accused for the most horrific crimes and yet, when forced to defend himself, is subject to trial by mobs and lobby. Let’s not forget Mrs Giuffre initiated this legal suit, and the duke is perfectly allowed to mount a legitimate defense as part of that process.
“Allegations can be easy to make and almost impossible to fight once made. However, it is not victim blaming for inconsistencies or defects in the plaintiff’s claims. All of us seek the truth.