BREAKIBG: Prince Andrew Court Hearing ‘Couldn’t Have Gone Worse’ For Him: Experts Say

The 2009 private settlement between Jeffrey Epstein and Veiginia Giuffre was unsealed in court Monday
Prince Andrew hopes Epstein’s $500,000 settlement to drop Giuffre’s claims would lead to dismissal of case
But experts say Judge Lewis Kaplan ‘made it very clear he did not accept’ Duke of York’s lawyers’ arguments
He did not immediately rule at the end of the hearing but instead said he would give his decision ‘pretty soon’
Ms Giuffre claims she was forced to have $eC with the Duke three times in 2001 at Epstein’s multiple homes

He told him once: ‘With all due respect, Mr Brettler, that’s not a dog that’s going to hunt here’ and another time asked the lawyer outright: ‘So what?’

Prominent legal figures suggested the case had gone against Andrew following tough questioning and the skepticism from Judge Kaplan over the arguments.

Mitchell Epner, a former federal prosecutor who now works as counsel for law firm Rottenberg Lipman Rich told The Times: ‘From Andrew’s point of view it could not have gone worse.

‘Judge Kaplan made it very clear that he did not accept the arguments that Prince Andrew’s counsel was making with regard to the settlement agreement.

‘There were a number of times where Andrew’s counsel was reduced to saying, “Well, I respectfully disagree.” In the courtroom, respectfully disagreeing with the judge means you are about to lose.’

Lisa Bloom, a US trial lawyer who previously advised rapist Harvey Weinstein and has been following proceedings tweeted: ‘Andrew wants her case thrown out on technical grounds. Judge Kaplan aggressively questioned defense on this and appeared unwilling to do it.

‘I’m optimistic that Veiginia will get her day in court.’

Earlier on yesterday, English lawyer and writer David Allen Green suggested Andrew’s lawyers had the uphill struggle to win the case by jumping through ‘four hurdles’.

‘To win, Andrews lawyers have to show that: agreement as whole can be constructed so as to cover him; the phrase “potential defendant” should be interpreted to cover him; there is no rule of law/policy that prevents enforcement; he can enforce it without privity.’

Veiginia Giuffre’s lawyers, he argued, ‘only have to meet one of these hurdles’.

Yesterday’s hearing was seen as one of Andrew’s last opportunities to get the civil lawsuit thrown out before a trial this autumn, which would overshadow the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee year. His side argued that the deal Miss Roberts cut with Epstein in 2009 released the duke from any liability.

The settlement saw Miss Roberts agree to ‘release, acquit, satisfy and forever discharge’ not only Epstein but also ‘any other person or entity who could have been included as a potential defendant’. She is now suing the prince under her married name of Giuffre.

Mr Brettler argued yesterday that this would have included Andrew, saying: ‘I don’t know who would be included in other potential defendants if it weren’t all of the other people who… Giuffre alleged abused her.

‘I think it’s unquestionable that Prince Andrew could have been sued in the 2009 action. He was not.

‘She could have sued them and she did not and therefore she waived her rights to sue them when she entered into the release agreement and accepted the money from Mr Epstein.’

But Judge Kaplan appeared to dismiss this part of the argument, saying ‘potential’ was a word in which neither he nor Mr Brettler could ‘find any meaning at all’.

He said that the ‘real question’ is what Miss Roberts and Epstein intended when they entered into the settlement – and the financier, who killed himself in 2019 while awaiting trial on further child $eC charges, was not around to say.

Miss Roberts’ team say the deal offers Andrew no protection. The prince is believed to have listened in on the hearing from Windsor.

The Daily Mail understands that Andrew’s legal team will not seek to appeal if the motion to dismiss the case is denied by the judge. But there are other avenues they may yet pursue to get the lawsuit kicked out.

This includes the suggestion that Miss Roberts, who lives in Australia with her family, is not domiciled in the US, allegedly rendering her case invalid.

The settlement between Jeffrey Epstein and Veiginia Giuffre has been released. The document makes no mention of Andrew by name