Prince Andrew lost his bid to dismiss Virginia Giuffre’s civil lawsuit

Questioned for his connection with Jeffrey Epstein, Prince Andrew "puts an end to his public commitments" **FILE PHOTOS**

Judge Kaplan finally made his ruling on Prince Andrew’s legal motion to dismiss Virginia Giuffre’s lawsuit. The judge did not dismiss the lawsuit, and the judge also said that the 2009 out-of-court settlement Virginia worked out with Jeffrey Epstein has no bearing on Virginia’s lawsuit against Andrew. It’s kind of complicated, so I’ll let the Daily Beast’s Royalist column explain:

Prince Andrew has failed in his last-ditch attempt to have a civil suit against him by Jeffrey Epstein victim Virginia Giuffre dismissed. New York Judge Lewis A. Kaplan today refused to grant the royal’s motion to dismiss, meaning that Queen Elizabeth’s son now faces the prospect of a full trial later this year.

The ruling unequivocally confirmed the impression formed by most observers that the judge was unimpressed by the argument made by Andrew’s lawyer, Andrew B. Brettler, that claimed the prince was released from legal jeopardy under the terms of a $500,000 settlement Giuffre signed with Epstein in 2009, which was itself only unsealed last Monday.

That agreement said that Giuffre agreed to “forever discharge… any other person or entity who could have been included as a potential defendant” from future legal action. Brettler argued that Andrew was “unambiguously” included in the category of “Other potential defendants”; however Giuffre’s lawyer, David Boies, responded that the 2009 category was not relevant to Andrew because there was no allegation that Andrew was involved in the “transporting” of Giuffre. Rather, he said, “Prince Andrew fell into the category of people who were doing the trafficking. He was somebody to whom the girls were trafficked.”

However the judge seemed much more interested in a section of the settlement that he said suggested its provisions could only be invoked by Epstein and Giuffre, or their agents, not by a third party such as Prince Andrew. As The Daily Beast noted in its report of the hearing, the judge’s approach seemed to catch both sides by surprise, momentarily flummoxing the usually unflappable Boies, who later apologized for his “slowness” in understanding what the judge was driving at when he highlighted a section that specified Epstein and Giuffre agreed the terms of the settlement “were not intended to be used by any other person.”

A clearly stunned Brettler retorted that, “It wouldn’t make sense for them to include language releasing other potential defendants if those other potential defendants didn’t have a right to use that contract as an affirmative defense.” The judge however told Brettler that this argument ran “smack into paragraph four, which says this has all got to be secret. They are not going to give anybody a copy of this agreement and the terms can’t be disclosed.”

[From The Daily Beast]

Basically, even though some of the wording in Epstein’s settlement with Giuffre was ambiguous in some sections, the legal document clearly intended to release Epstein of further liability and Epstein alone, and besides all that, it was supposed to be a sealed, secret document, not a blanket civil immunity for every predator to whom Virginia was trafficked.

This means that the case will proceed and the trial is still – at this moment – scheduled for later this year, likely the fall. The Daily Beast points out that Andrew might now feel he has nothing to lose “by simply not participating any further in the trial and allowing the court to register a default judgment against him, the terms of which would likely be very hard to enforce.” Meaning, the case will obviously proceed and Andrew accepts it as fait accompli that Virginia will “win,” but Andrew will ensconce himself in the royal bubble and never pay anything to Virginia or travel to America again. This isn’t a criminal proceeding, there is no way that Andrew could conceivably be extradited. Now, would that option look horrible? For sure. And I still think that Andrew will offer some kind of “settlement” just to stop this mess.

Panorama, The Prince and the Epstein Scandal

Prince Andrew and Virginia Roberts **FILE PHOTOS**

Photos courtesy of Backgrid, Avalon Red.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

133 Responses to “Prince Andrew lost his bid to dismiss Virginia Giuffre’s civil lawsuit”

  1. J ferber says:

    Hallelujah!

    • Elizabeth Regina says:

      The judge gave every indication of his verdict during the ridiculously weak arguments presented by Paedrew’s lawyers. I wonder if he will be dragged away kicking and screaming from under his mummy’s skirts as he is made to face Virginia in court or if he will settle.

  2. Lexistential says:

    I. Am. Here. For. This. WITH ALL THE POPCORN GIFS.

    Rooting for Virginia. I applaud her bravery and conviction every time she’s in the press, and the still-titled Duke of York is just deplorable.

    • Elizabeth Regina says:

      Make my popcorn a large bucket please. This is set to run and run. I love that it will take some shine off the Jubilee and the Lazybridges’ tour of America.

      • MerlinsMom1018 says:

        I wonder if House Cambridge WILL come here. Can you just image reporters here and their endless questions????? no sucking up to them, no embigging stories, just question after question about Andrew, H & M, and on and on at every stop…

      • Elizabeth Regina says:

        @MerlinsMom1018 I love this for the Keenbridges 🙂

      • BothSidesNow says:

        @ MerlinsMom1018, I think that the Lambridges are under the disillusionment that they will be welcomed here in open arms, especially in NYC!!! There may be a few supporters, but not much! Plus, the US reporter will NOT be kind to either of them! Unless Bitter Brother chooses another major metropolitan city, LA, he won’t be able to find any $$$ that he’s looking to score. The US has their number, on top of Andy’s lawsuit, I see them changing when and where they intend to visit, IF they visit at ALL!!

        And with the questions, I wonder if Mumbles, clutching her pearls, will be caught rolling her eyes at everyone as she stupidly did with the visit at the school!! Even schoolchildren RATTLE the Queen of Steadiness and Readiness at the drop of Harry’s name!!

  3. olliesmom says:

    Good. Serves him right.

  4. Eurydice says:

    Hahahahahahahahahahahaha!!

    I wonder why a financial judgement would be very difficult to enforce – maybe the legal experts here have an answer.

    • MaryContrary says:

      Not a legal expert other than what I’ve gleaned from tv -but he doesn’t have American wages to garnish or American properties that a lien could be put against.

      • Eurydice says:

        Yes, of course, thank you. So, we’re back to public opinion and the RF’s conscience.

      • LaraW" says:

        I personally have never had to deal with this situation, so take everything I say with a large tub of salt. I defer completely to basically anyone else.

        IF the UK elects to enforce the judgement, and IF Virginia is allowed to use US procedure to aid in the execution of the money judgement, wage garnishments and property in the US doesn’t matter. Both of these are big IFs.

        In the US, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 69(a)(2) allows for discovery from “any person—including the judgment debtor—as provided in these rules or by the procedure of the state where the court is located.” Since New York law governs here, under CPLR Rule 5224(a)(3)(i), if Virginia has “a reasonable belief that the party receiving the subpoena has in their possession information about the debtor that will assist the creditor in collecting his or her judgment,” she can serve a subpoena on any “individual, corporation, partnership or sole proprietorship.”

        In other words, Virginia can subpoena Andrew’s banks for records of his assets and any other person, business, financial institution, etc. for information on his finances, so long as she has “reasonable belief” that the information they provide will help her collect the money. She can also take depositions.

        Whether the individuals and institutions comply with the subpoenas is another story, and actually getting the money based on the information she has is also another deal. I have no experience in this field at all, so like I said, take EVERYTHING I said here with a MASSIVE grain of salt. However, I think that if Andrew decides to enter a default judgment, he is potentially opening a whole different can of worms.

      • LaraW" says:

        Nvm, Lizzie Bathory has the answers! Ignore everything I said with respect to the UK stuff.

        But the US stuff is still good, lol.

    • Lizzie Bathory says:

      Lawyer here (“expert” is debatable lol). The US & the UK do not have reciprocal enforcement agreements, so if there is a judgment against Andrew, Virginia’s attorneys would take the judgment to English courts to enforce his debt to her. As long as the foreign court had jurisdiction, the English courts don’t look to the merits of the case–they just take the judgment as a given & basically charge the debt against Andrew. He might contest jurisdiction since he isn’t in the US, but he’s already submitted to the US court’s jurisdiction, so that will fail. So eventually, any assets Andrew has would be subject to garnishment/liens in the UK.

      If Andrew refuses to continue to engage & gets a default judgment against him, that will speed up the process. So his “best” avenue is to drag it out by proceeding to trial & causing as many delays as possible. And in the mean time, stash any money he has in shell companies/offshore trusts, etc.

      ETA His actual best option would be to settle, but between Virginia wanting public vindication, Andrew’s unwillingness to admit fault & the Queen needing to not be seen paying the debts of her rapist son, I don’t see a settlement happening.

      • Mac says:

        Andrew should have quietly settled with Virginia years ago. If he goes to court he will likely lose, and if he accepts a default judgement he is basically admitting guilt.

        Amazingly, he feels like a victim in a situation entirely of his own making. Life under Charles is going to be very unpleasant for him.

      • windyriver says:

        Thanks to the various lawyers here and below providing their information and interpretation in this and other situations (e.g., Meghan’s suit). Not a lawyer myself, but for whatever reason have always found the legal ins and outs very interesting.

      • Feeshalori says:

        Lizzie, this may be a simplistic question but if he does stash his money away won’t he still be liable for payment since it’s an obvious ploy for concealment if he did it once this case began? Could the legal system look at the dates the transactions were made and rule that he’s still liable for payment?

      • BothSidesNow says:

        @ Mac, yes. Had PedoAndy settled years ago he wouldn’t be in this mess! Hell, if he hadn’t RAPED Virginia, he wouldn’t be in this mess!!

        But no worries as his Mummy will make certain that she tucks away an enormous amount of pounds for him to survive on. Let’s hope it comes up short of what he needs.

      • BothSidesNow says:

        @ Lizzie Bathory, thank you very much on your lovely explanation of how this would work out in the UK as I am certain that PedoAndy will fight tooth and nail from giving Virginia a pound!! I think that Pedo thinks he is untouchable and cannot be forced to give her a pound. That’s why he is the WORST type of client for any attorney.

        It will be glorious when Virginia wins her case against the Rapist that he is!!!

      • LaraW" says:

        @Lizzie – Can she use Rule 69 if he insists that he has no assets?

      • Lizzie Bathory says:

        @Freeshalori Not a simplistic question! Legally, yes, he’d be liable. The tricky part would be proving what he did. Shell companies, “blind trusts” & other trusts/entities have been used for years by the royals & others to conceal who really owns what. Many are of dubious legality, but the truth is not many have the time or resources to unravel ownership interests for the rich & powerful.

        A personal story: Years ago, a (thankfully former) partner at my firm handed me the file of a very nice but incredibly shady foreign national. I worked with her Cayman accounts for years & did her kids’ complicated tax returns. One year, I was on the phone with the Cayman’s office of Coutts (yes, the same firm that does the Queen’s private banking). I was trying to get some pretty standard information on my client’s accounts, but everyone I talked to seemed very rushed & frazzled. I got the distinct impression files were being shredded. Sure enough, the office shut down–right before the Panama Papers came out. It was the closest I’ve ever come to international financial intrigue lol.

      • Lizzie Bathory says:

        @LaraW I would think so in a US proceeding, but admittedly, I’m terrible at CivPo. I would think the UK has similar rules.

      • Feeshalori says:

        Lizzie, thank you for your response and for your detailed analysis above. I hope Virginia takes Pedo Prince to the cleaners. And that must have been interesting to be just a phone call away from such shady financial intrigue! And thanks to all the legal eagles here for clarifying this situation too.

      • LaraW" says:

        @Lizzie – that is a pretty badass story. 🙂

      • windyriver says:

        @Lizzie Bathory – slightly OT, but your colorful and crazy story reminded me – have you ever read Sarah Caudwell’s books? She was a barrister with expertise in tax law, who also wrote detective stories. Her four books revolve around a group of young London lawyers working in that field and their various adventures in places such as Sark/Channel Islands. It’s been a long time since I read them, but now I’ve got the urge to revisit them. Your story sounds like it could have come out of one of her books. (Her tone in the books is fairly lighthearted and tongue in cheek, but sounds like your experiences, maybe not so much!)

  5. TIFFANY says:

    If Virginia does accept a settlement, I hope it is nothing less than 10 figures and a apology she can release to any media outlet of her choosing.

  6. Deanne says:

    It’s about time that arrogant ass pays for his behaviour. It’s taken far too long.

  7. M says:

    Too bad this isn’t criminal proceedings, because his ass belongs in prison. He’s carried on the family tradition of never facing consequences, and it’s time someone gets their comeuppance.

    • ThatsNotOkay says:

      A default judgment in the civil proceedings might compel prosecutors to charge him criminally, even if he refuses to cooperate or leave the comfort of his castle for the rest of his days. All the better. A non-stupid person would settle on Virgina’s terms and put it behind him, and allow himself to go places, even if he’ll be booed anywhere and everywhere, for all eternity. It would also free Charles and William from being under his cloud. Which is precisely why he WON’T do it.

      • LaraW" says:

        Statute of limitations has run out on possible criminal charges. NY’s Child Victims Act allows individuals to bring civil suits until they’re 55, but they can only press charges until they’re 28.

      • Mrs.Krabapple says:

        @LaraW (or any lawyer here) – but under federal sex trafficking law, there is no statute of limitations? (That’s what I heard anyway). And I thought the New York statute of limitations varied depending on the degree (longer time to charge the more severe cases)? At any rate, I don’t think they should bring criminal charges (even if they could) until the queen is dead. She will find a way to protect Andrew from jail, even if it’s to lie about why he was in American to give him immunity. But a big “thank you” to all the lawyers here who educate the rest of us.

      • LaraW" says:

        Andrew wasn’t involved in the trafficking scheme. He was provided “sexual services” by girls who were trafficked, but he didn’t facilitate in the trafficking of girls for Epstein’s ring.

  8. Seaflower says:

    Yes!

    I wonder if Alan Dershowitz is having a good day.

  9. Lady Digby says:

    Boris will be rejoicing that this development might knock him off the headlines. Both men are rich and powerful but everybody is accountable for their actions and no one should be above the law. Today chickens are coming home to roost!

  10. Capepopsie says:

    Ouch! P A is getting his arm twisted!
    Now I wonder how he will respond.
    Good for Virginia Giuffre! 👌
    Such a brave woman! 👏

  11. Jais says:

    What are the consequences if he just defaulted and didn’t even settle with Virginia? He’d be officially labeled a sex offender in court and…what else happens?

    • Lady Digby says:

      Anybody know if he can do a total ignoral or can he be forced to at least give a comprehensive deposition under oath in UK? Given his car crash 2019 interview his lawyer wont want him chatting away and answering impertinent questions!! My best guess is huge settlement “to spare TQ any more anguish”.

    • Amy T says:

      Hoping some lawyer celebitches will weigh in on this. I’m sure I’m not the only one wondering about the legal ramifications of all this.

    • Merricat says:

      The consequences include global contempt for the monarchy.

    • superashes says:

      Lawyer Celebitch here, he can’t just ignore the case. If there is a default she then can go in for ex parte proof and get a monetary judgment. She then can enforce that judgment in the UK and use their court process to garnish his assets and, potentially, force a sale of properties.

      It might take some time and costs for her to accomplish that, but it isn’t a difficult process. There is no second hearing that would happen in the UK on the merits. Basically, if he just ignores her his costs will only climb as the judgment will incur interest and she likely will also be entitled to attorney’s fees and costs to enforce said judgment as well if he makes her go across the pond to do so.

      • Cathy says:

        As others have mentioned, she could have any US judgment recognised in the UK courts (which is quite straightforward), and then it would be enforceable like any other UK court judgment. If he couldn’t pay in full, she could seek possession of properties, bank accounts etc and ultimately apply to bankrupt him.

  12. Stacy Dresden says:

    Nelson from the Simpsons says: Ha Haaa

  13. Harper says:

    I predict Andrew chooses the ghosting the trial option, and his lawyers will be glad to be rid of him.

  14. Angelica Schuyler says:

    If Andrew skipped out on a judgement in VG’s favor, can you just imagine the headlines?
    “Andrew, the Deadbeat Duke of York…”

    Which looks worse for the rest of the BRF, Andrew settling, or Andrew being a straight-up deadbeat? I wonder what Charles and Betty will pressure him to do?

    • lanne says:

      That really messes up anything his daughters want to do regarding human trafficking charities. They can’t exactly talk about a problem that their father is convicted of, while still supporting that father. Well, knowing the royal family, they have the bad taste to do just that.

      • WhoElse says:

        TBH, it messes it up for any royal, perhaps save H & M. Both will be able to speak freely and say Andrew was a disgusting creep they barely spoke to and actively avoided, but the rest are bound by their own boring version of omerta: never complain, never explain. They will b*tch about him through “sources”, but Camilla is the patron of a charity for abused and trafficked women in Lagos. How the h*ll is she supposed to do that while avoiding Andrew’s own jaunts to Pedo Island? Can she say for certain that no member of her family was involved with those who trafficked some of the women she claims to want to help? They really f*cked up by not just stripping him of his titles and exiling him once the case was filed.

      • Sid says:

        I believe Eugenie in particular seemed to be doing work supporting efforts to combat human trafficking and slavery, and even had a podcast planned. The podcast never premiered and went the way of the dodo bird once things started heating up against her father.

  15. Jan90067 says:

    I don’t think there’s a way for her to collect, esp. if he goes into the “Royal Bubble”. I’m SURE there’s been frantic transferring of any/all assets to Freeloader, his daughters, or even into the grandkids’ names by now. Poor Pitiful Pedo won’t have a pound to his name!

    The *only* satisfaction, as infuriating as it might be, will be knowing he can’t show his face w/out this following him as his own personal “sweat stink”. Everyone will know why Pedo isn’t out front, on the balcony next to Mummy, etc. This will be in every article written about him, every mention of him, and even in his obituary.

  16. Mads says:

    Read the headline, punched up into the air. Go Virginia! We are rooting for you.

  17. Snuffles says:

    Here are your options Andrew:

    1) Let the trial continue and massacre your reputation and the royal family’s reputation even further. Because make no mistake they WILL be dragged into this. The world has seen the pictures of Epstein and Maxwell hob knobbing with other royals and enjoying your private properties.

    2) Be ready to pay the piper.

    • Lizzie Bathory says:

      He’s going to keep pushing for option 1 since he can’t admit he did anything wrong & his attorneys can’t do much with such an obstinate client. This is the same man who thought his BBC interview was a triumph. It’s going to be a disaster & I’m here for it.

      • STRIPE says:

        As long as his mother is alive, Option 1 will be it for him because she will protect him to the extents that she can. Once she’s gone, I hope Charles will throw him to the wolves…but frankly I wonder if he will because kicking Andrew to the curb will be admitting there’s a chink in the Royal armor and lord knows we can’t have that.

  18. Deanne from Canada says:

    Let’s see how the piano posing, AGA using, polo playing, hair flipping, RH reputation holds up after this.

  19. Agreatreckoning says:

    Judge Kaplan also wrote that Andrew’s lawyers failed to successfully challenge the constitutionality of the lawsuit Virginia filed against him in August.. They were grossly challenging that.

    Good for Virginia!

  20. Matthew says:

    oh I think he’s seeing the coverage today

  21. Scorpion says:

    Lmao, Richard Eden stays manifesting. This morning on Twitter, he was asking for News from America and God heard him and there is now going to be a trial. Time for some truth and justice 😂😎

  22. Lola says:

    Whatever happened to his standing argument? With her residency out of country for so long that was the one that caught my eye

    • Persephone says:

      The judge dismissed that as irrelevant.

      • Lola says:

        He called it Irrelevant? Really? Standing is like fundamental to having the right to sue in the first place. It will kill even meritorious suits

        That’s why I was surprised they tried this attack first – but then that dude up there said it best – this is going to be a series of small motions from him designed to stall

      • LaraW" says:

        Andrew never raised the issue of standing as a potential defense.

        On December 28, Andrew filed a Motion to Compel Plaintiff Virginia Giuffre to Respond to Limited Jurisdictional Discovery, Sit for Deposition, and Stay All Other Discovery Pending Ruling on Subject Matter Jurisdiction. On December 31, Judge Kaplan denied the motion without prejudice; he noted that Andrew had already served extensive discovery that includes requests for documents regarding her domicile. Virginia is due to respond on January 14 and that deadline hasn’t passed. Andrew’s bid to stay discovery was denied because he failed to show good cause.

    • RoyalBlue says:

      Lola, caught your eye? Whoever told you that was wrong. Listen, this is very serious. when you want to confirm with unofficial legal sources, come to Celebitchy. The source of your information is important and this site has some of the most rational and intelligent, fact-based analyses out there.

  23. s808 says:

    reporters wanted a trial— looks like they got one! rooting for you virginia!! make his pockets hurt at the very least.

  24. Miss Jupitero says:

    That roaring sound you all just heard is all the toilets in BP, KP, CH etc. flushing at once. PA’s reputation is going to be turned I to absolute sludge. He will be leaving skidmarks everywhere he goes.

    • Sid says:

      I wonder if they will allow him to show his face at QEII’s jubilee. If he’s there, waving from balconies and barges, the BRF will look gross for allowing a sex offender to stand there cheesing and grinning like nothing is wrong. If they keep him out of sight, then it raises the question of why they are hiding him but at the same time won’t listen to all of the military establishments who are practically begging QEII to remove him from his ceremonial posts. It puts the BRF in a bad PR position. And it couldn’t happen to a more deserving bunch.

  25. Lizzie Bathory says:

    This isn’t my area of law, but I looked at the settlement agreement. I think it was clearly intended to release not only Epstein, but his agents, heirs, employees, “predecessors” (interesting), etc, who are referred to as the “Second Parties” to the agreement. I think it was really intended to protect Epstein (obviously), Maxwell, various employees & perhaps Les Wexner (or other “predecessors”).

    I also think the judge doesn’t like how broadly the agreement is drafted with respect to “other potential defendants.” And in spite of the broad drafting, in my opinion, the whole thing doesn’t hold up to scrutiny. It was sealed for a reason. Sorry not sorry, Andrew.

    • LaraW" says:

      Lol. Judge Kaplan: The Settlement Agreement says it will be governed by Florida law. So I will apply Florida law. Florida law says that if a contract is ambiguous, the ambiguity must be resolved by the trier of fact. I am not a trier of fact here– that’s the job of a trial jury. Which means there needs to be a trial. Motion to dismiss denied.

  26. Merricat says:

    At this point, Charles has to know that the damage can only be mitigated, not erased.

    • Lady Digby says:

      Charles exiled his own son without turning a hair so PA must be sweating in anticipation of his own leaving package (although I am sure FK will allow him to leave with Fergie and a few corgie keyrings!)

      • Sid says:

        The problem here for Charles is whether the sex offender will go quietly or whether he will try and burn the house down in retaliation on his way out if he’s not satisfied with whatever he’s offered. Over time I have come to agree with those who are saying it’s not just QEII alone trying to protect Andrew, the courtiers are in on it too. His shady dealings might not have involved him alone…

      • Eurydice says:

        Harry had something better to go to. Andrew will be hanging on like an octopus. As soon as Charles gets one tentacle loose, another will grab on.

  27. Jaded says:

    Sure you vile POS — let this go to trial so that the whole world sees again and again what a truly horrible person you are. No amount of protecting from your mummy will save you from being universally reviled. When this sad saga is finally done and dusted, I hope Charles sends you and your disgusting ex-wife far, far away and we never have to see your loathsome faces again.

  28. pixyloo says:

    Waaahooo! The news we’ve all been waiting for! (I know still a long way to go)

    • Debbie says:

      I think it’s disgraceful that Kate’s wiglets have been getting more day-to-day press than Andrew’s court case (actually, I’ll start a BM-inspired trend: Andrew’s BOMBSHELL international court case). Still no sustained calls for Andrew to be “stripped” of his titles, or military ribbons, I see. Typical!

  29. Becks1 says:

    YES. I think we all had a feeling it was going to go this way after the hearing, but still, nice to have it confirmed.

    I think he’s going to run and hide in the royal bubble. But my god, what a bad look for a royal, the son of the HEAD OF STATE of one of our closest allies, to run and hide from a civil judgment for raping a child.

    • purplecupcakes says:

      This should be reason enough for Brits to take a deeper look at their system, but I doubt it will do anything.

      • OriginalRose says:

        I’m a brit and I used to ..not ‘like’ the royals but was alright with them even though I knew it’s a ridiculous idea to think one bunch of humans is any better than another. Since their treatment of H and M however I couldn’t hate them more. But all this talk of ‘getting rid of them’…I’d love to get rid of them but how would that be done? I was talking with my husband about it this morning, would it have to be a political party suggesting a referendum? I really don’t know how ‘we’ the people would go about it…it’s a 1000 year old establishment, street protests? They’re achieving less and less in this country – they probably won’t be allowed for much longer. I’m just really interested going forward, how it could happen to scale back/abolish the monarchy. There’s no way Charles would do it…William, could do?

  30. dido says:

    Just saw Omid tweet “They all wished for a royal trial — and now they’ve got one.” I am CACKLING hehehehe.

    • Agreatreckoning says:

      Hahaha-that is awesome.

    • Lady Digby says:

      Yes that is too funny for words, KP prayers have been answered but not the way they intended. The Woking Pizza Express might get their own blue plaque out of all the oodles of trial publicity!

      • windyriver says:

        WPE should sell t-shirts, make some money, like Four Seasons Total Landscaping did (“Rake America Great Again”) after Giuliani screwed up and booked a Trump election event there instead of at the Four Seasons Hotel.

        The BM could also use it as an informal poll re: Andrew sentiment in the UK, depending on how sales went. That would probably be at least as valid as the other polls their media “report” on.

    • Sarah says:

      That’s outstanding!

    • RoyalBlue says:

      Brilliant.

    • Debbie says:

      Oh my God, Omid! Do the kids still say “Burn!”? If so, now’s the perfect time because Omid was right. The BM were clamoring for a trial.

  31. aquarius64 says:

    Justice for Virginia . I just wish this was a criminal proceeding. The BRF is going to take a massive hit for this; Betty’s jubilee street party is wrecked. This is also karma for another American citizen the Windsors abused. Get the popcorn (I like mine with butter.)

  32. Veda says:

    Looks like Randy Andy’s next move will be to just not turn up for the hearing so that en ex-parte order can be passed. There are already trial balloons in the BM that say Virginia should settle and get 5 mill or proceed with the case and end up with nothing as Andy is not bound to pay the damages. But that need not be the case. I’m a lawyer and can say that foreign judgements can be enforced under private international law and international treaties & conventions. In India, where I practice, judgements passed abroad will be given effect to in India, if this is where the defendant and assets are, unless it’s against public policy or the sovereignty and integrity of the country. I don’t know English law but I presume they would have a similar legal obligation. In India if sub peonas are not heeded to, the court could even issue a non bail able warrant for the arrest of the individual.

    • The Hench says:

      Some other lawyers have commented above that yes, Virginia will be able to pursue costs through the UK courts. So Andrew will be made to pay whether he engages or not.

  33. MerlinsMom1018 says:

    Said it before and will say it again
    American Women…f*ck around and find out!!!!!!

  34. Over it says:

    Guess someone is finally sweating bullets.

  35. Pix22 says:

    Great news. He’s so creepy. Sadly, ass a distraction, they are going to start attacking Meghan in 3…2…1…

    • Feeshalori says:

      And if the trial is going ahead at the end of the year when Harry’s memoir is due out, there will be a countdown to more heightened distraction.

      • The Hench says:

        No, no, he should capitalise on it. Do several chapters all on Andrew and his shady, nefarious activities and merch it on the back of the trial.

  36. Sarah says:

    This makes me so happy, for Virginia, for all the other countless women and girls raped and abused, and that the BRF will finally face some kinds of consequences for their terrible actions, even if that only ends up being reputational.

    Actions have consequences you entitled pervert.

    • Anna says:

      They are alredy starting a narrative that Andy should “sort this mess out for Queen’s sake”. Like this is and ex-wife trash talking him in press and he should just pay her to make her stop. It’s a f*** trial for criminal actions and they conveniently forget that. I hope Virginia destroys him and proves that BRF knew it all alond the way. Even if he will not be held accountable the whole world will see that BRF can basically do whatever they want and avoid conseqence.

  37. Amy Bee says:

    To borrow from other people on twitter, the British press wanted a trial, now they got one. For anyone to state that the press was reporting on Andrew without fear or favour, just look at the articles printed a week or two ago when they were eagerly anticipating that the Judge would drop the case because of Virgina’s agreement with Epstein. The press is and was always in his corner and it will be interesting how they would report on it now. Will they be calling for Andrew to be stripped of his titles and to give up his security? I doubt it.

  38. AmyB says:

    Soooooo fucking happy to hear this!!! If this rapist POS just lets this trial got to default & judgment…what a way to go out – complete coward LOL! Love it! I know other lawyers here have commented on the issues of Virginia collecting from him in that case, and I hope she will be able to get what she is entitled to. However, her justice will be served, and is being served! This disgusting pedophile rapist has been exposed for who he is, and there is nowhere left to hide Andrew, not even with your disgusting RF. Good riddance.

    Virginia – you are hero for sexual abuse victims everywhere!! Thank you and we are proud of you! I hope you can begin to find closure and healing from all of this horror xoxo

  39. Fabi says:

    Huh…I wonder if They got a heads up about a decision coming down (and not looking good for Andrew) and that is why Fergie stopped doing her YouTube children stories!

  40. jferber says:

    I could easily see Andrew doing an ostrich (so like his mother) and totally ignoring everything in his “bubble.” His reputation is shredded anyway, so it will fall to Charles once the queen is gone to strip Andrew of everything and hopefully Andrew will disappear forever. No, not a great resolution, but he is damaged goods and will never change.

    • L4Frimaire says:

      I don’t think the royals will do much with Andrew except quietly shunt him aside because they don’t think he did anything that bad and the Sussexes are the main enemy in their eyes. I hope he is held accountable in this case and is forced to admit wrongdoing, or that other women come forward. However, this isn’t a slam dunk for Virginia and these types of cases always discredit the victims, especially if they’re not perfect. However, if he settles, it proves he did something, if he doesn’t respond it looks bad and she wins by default, and even if he wins, a lot of dirt will be dragged up. The Rota are finally getting a royal trial but I suspect the British papers will suddenly have an ink shortage and write very little on this.

      • Debbie says:

        Dear God, please let this storyline be brought back in glorious technicolor in “The Crown”! I’d just looove for the various palaces to lose their grip again and try to ban Netflix and, in so doing, drive more publicity to the show and the network.

  41. House of No says:

    Good!

  42. Andrea says:

    It’s kind of gross that David Boies is trying to use this case to rehabilitate his reputation after working for Harvey Weinstein, but on the other hand he’s very good at what he does and it’s good Giuffre has a really good litigator running her case.

    • L4Frimaire says:

      The thing is it’s probably smart to work with someone who has defended offenders like Weinstein. Even Lisa Bloom, who was following the Judge Kaplan’s hearing and breaking it down very well ,was briefly associated with Weinstein. This is why there are so many bad lawyer jokes.

    • Amy T says:

      He was Elizabeth Holmes’ lawyer when she was heading Theranos, and his job was to go after any current or former employee who tried to get the word out about what was really going on there.

  43. equality says:

    Omid’s tweet: “They all wished for a royal trial — and now they’ve got one.”

  44. Mina_Esq says:

    I wonder if those stipends they get as royals can be garnished. I wonder if there is some way to register an extraterritorial civil judgment in England…probably not. I also wonder if she can start a lawsuit against him in England, since he is resident in that country. I may go down a rabbit hole and try to research this. I want Andy to have to pay. He is so gross.

  45. MA says:

    I don’t know why the British aren’t out with their pitchforks to abolish the entire thing. You and your institutions are supporting an unelected monarch and her extended family at all levels. Financially, in the press, socially, culturally, every level. That includes their criminal activities, and that’s not just limited to Andrew: Your tax dollars go toward protecting sex offenders, subsidizing their legal bills and security, their palaces, vacations, travel, clothing, tennis courts, energy bills. The royals run PR campaigns using your money to brainwash you into apathy or adoration, to continue letting them use your money. Your whole system is based on glorification of unqualified people with the “right” bloodline or who have married the “right” bloodline.

    I see Brits bring up Trump as an argument for keeping the monarchy but at least Trump had a term limit and at least the people had a choice. The Queen, Charles, William could be like Trump for all we know, just with the benefit of deification and protection at all levels in British society.

    • purplecupcakes says:

      Right? Can you imagine being British and funding this royal sh*tshow? This is embarrassing beyond belief. You simply cannot compare this royal institution to anything in America, including our shady politicians b/c at least they have to get elected to serve….

      These are people (who have no discernible talent) are incredibly privileged simply because of the family they were born into. They grow up believing that life does not have consequences and finally are facing the sharp ego blow that is justice.

      • fishface says:

        Prince Andrew, Boris Johnson, Jacob Rees-Mogg, Lady Colin Campbell, Tony Blair…..the list is endless….

    • SourcesclosetoKate says:

      💯

  46. jferber says:

    MA, you nailed it. I’m loath to bring the former defeated guy into all this mess, but I wonder if they would react the way he did when he lost– stage an insurrection. Would you really put it past them?

  47. Tessa says:

    I hope Fergie knows enough not to talk to the media and just keep quiet.

  48. Ina says:

    I hope this pedo takes the whole BRF down the sewer with him and put an end to that entire rotten family’s unearned privilege.

  49. Margaret says:

    Excellent outcome! If he has an ounce of commonsense he will now settle. The terms of settlement would include a “terms not to be disclosed” provision so the world wouldn’t get to know how much he paid. If he doesn’t settle, we will get to know the evidence and verdict. This is great entertainment for a republican Aussie lawyer!

  50. blunt talker says:

    I was reading comments on the DM-people on there were saying she was of age and that the is happened in the UK-people trying to explain that this took place in NY and the age on consent is 18-she was 17 at the time-this is what the civil case is about people-the New York incident-I listened to some news reporters on the tv and some have stated the stuff related to Andrew is coarse and disgusting-if this case goes to trial all the disgusting stuff will be released in court and the whole world will hear it-if he plans to fight this lawsuit then he better have a tough stomach and mindset to hear about himself in this sexually charged atmosphere-as I stated before his parents knew something was wrong with him decades ago-he got no help for it and now here we are today-do I wish any of this on the queen -no I do not-but royal or not he is not above the law and we left kings and queens over 250 years ago-his parents cannot atone for his sins-he has to pay for them himself-let the chips fall where they may.

  51. Bread and Circuses says:

    I live in hope that Charles becomes king and immediately orders Andrew to go to America and help law enforcement with their inquiries.

    He’s no fan of Andrew, and he’s made plenty of noise about “streamlining” the monarchy. Streamlining it via orange jumpsuit would probably suit him fine.

Commenting Guidelines

We aim to be a friendly, welcoming site where people can discuss entertainment stories and current events in a lighthearted, safe environment without fear of harassment, excessive negativity, or bullying. Different opinions, backgrounds, ages, and nationalities are welcome here - hatred and bigotry are not. If you make racist or bigoted remarks, comment under multiple names, or wish death on anyone you will be banned. There are no second chances if you violate one of these basic rules.

By commenting you agree to our comment policy and our privacy policy

Please e-mail the moderators at cbcomments at gmail.com to delete a comment if it's offensive or spam. If your comment disappears, it may have been eaten by the spam filter. Please email us to get it retrieved.

You can sign up to get an image next to your name at Gravatar.com Thank you!

Leave a comment

The reply feature does not work on phones in vertical mode. We are working on fixing it! Turn your phone horizontally and you will be able to reply to a comment.

Save my name and email in this browser for the next time I comment