Yesterday was a major hearing in Virginia Giuffre’s civil lawsuit against Prince Andrew for sexual abuse. Lawyers for Giuffre and Andrew gathered in a court hearing which was open to the media. Judge Kaplan heard various arguments from both sides, and long story short, he seemed to lean quite heavily towards Giuffre’s side. As in, it looks very likely that Judge Kaplan will rule – some time this week – that Giuffre’s lawsuit can go ahead to trial, that Andrew’s lawyers have not shown why the case should be dismissed.

Lawyer Lisa Bloom had an excellent thread reporting on and analyzing the hearing, go here to see the full thread. Andrew’s lawyers argued that Giuffre was not specific enough with her claims of being raped at 17 and the judge said she had no obligation to do so in the complaint. Andrew’s lawyers also argued that the New York law itself is unconstitutional, the law extending the statute of limitations on sex crimes, child abuse, etc. Andrew’s lawyers were truly arguing that no victim of rape, molestation or sexual abuse should be able to sue their abusers using this law. Judge Kaplan also seemed to agree with Giuffre’s legal argument re: the 2009 settlement with Jeffrey Epstein and how Andrew should not be “included” in the legal language.

The British papers are full of reporting on the court hearing and Judge Kaplan told the lawyers that he would have a ruling soon, which is why I think we’ll probably hear about it this week, if not today. The New York Times did have an interesting story about how pathetic Andrew is, and how this case will affect the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee. There were some quotes from royal commentators I wanted to highlight:

“If the case drags on and on and on, yes, it will be a thorn in the side of the Platinum Jubilee,” said Dickie Arbiter, who served as a press secretary to the queen from 1988 to 2000. Beyond the fraught issues raised in that case, he said, were the lingering questions stirred by the rift between the family and Prince Harry and his American-born wife, Meghan.

“My gut feeling is that most people have lost interest in him,” said Penny Junor, a royal historian. “He’s arrogant and not particularly popular. Since he’s gone past middle age, there’s been a general sense of ‘what’s he for?’”

In one respect, however, Andrew could remain a lingering problem, Ms. Junor said. The queen has not stripped him of his honorary military titles, some of which he inherited from his father, Prince Philip, who died last year. That has prompted objections from veterans, who say it is unseemly to be under the command of a person facing such allegations.

Julian Perreira, a former sergeant in the Grenadier Guards who served in Afghanistan, told The Times of London last week, “Being allowed to retain his role as colonel of the Grenadier Guards and other military titles, Prince Andrew will put a stain on the regiment’s proud history and will devalue the hard work of past and future generations of Grenadiers. He must step down immediately.”

“The queen gives and the queen takes away, but she’d probably be reluctant to take this away because that’s all he got left,” Mr. Arbiter said. “She is the head of state and head of the nation, but at the end of the day, she’s also his mother.”

[From The New York Times]

This whole “what is she going to do, she’s his mother” thing is so f–king stupid. She stripped her beloved grandson of his military honors because he refused to be bullied and harassed by the courtiers and media. The Queen refused to allow Harry, a veteran of war, the ability to have a wreath laid on the Cenotaph on Remembrance Day. And at the same f–king time, she’s giving Andrew millions of dollars under the table so that he can pay his lawyers to argue in court that victims should have no right to sue their abusers. Note how Dickie Arbiter couldn’t wait to drag Harry and Meghan into Andrew’s mess too, like “Harry writing a memoir” is somehow equivalent to Andrew’s criminal and disgusting behavior.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid.