Tuesday, March 26

Prince Andrew will no longer be ‘HRH’, and that is now the least of his worries | kate williams


IIn 1986, Prince Andrew married Sarah Ferguson at Westminster Abbey in the face of an onslaught of glowing media coverage. Thirty-five years later, he faces a sexual assault lawsuit from Virginia Giuffre, a woman who was trafficked by Jeffrey Epstein. He is in disgrace, stripped of his military titles, he will no longer be officially “Her Royal Highness”, nor will he represent the Queen. After yesterday’s summit with his mother at Windsor Castle, Andrew is no longer a member of royalty and must, as the Buckingham Palace statement made clear, face the lawsuit as a “private citizen.”

Giuffre, a survivor of trafficking and abuse, has been courageous. Attacked and slandered by powerful individuals, she has continued to defend her case. She is, her team says, determined to have her day at court. Demand can now continue as early as this fall. In the Platinum Jubilee year, which was supposed to be about celebrating the Queen and her long reign, the royal family is faced with the worrying possibility that attention is now turning to the court case against Andrew.

Prince Andrew’s wedding was supposed to be the beginning of a happy ending for “Randy Andy.” And yet it was not. By 1999, Andrew had befriended Jeffrey Epstein, who died before he could be tried. Andrew invited Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell to royal parties. When others quickly distanced themselves from Epstein, who had been convicted of sex crimes in 2008, Andrew visited and stayed with him in New York. Giuffre, when he says he met Andrew in London in 2001, had Epstein take a photo with his own camera, a photo that Andrew claimed was tampered with, although other witnesses say they saw him with her in New York and on the private island. Epstein. .

Also Read  Which is more dysfunctional, the United States or the United Kingdom? I created a Global Shame Index to find out | Arwa Mahdawi

Few members of royalty have had to face the law. To look for a similar situation, we have to go back to Albert Edward, Prince of Wales, the future Edward VII. In 1868, Sir Charles Mordaunt accused his young wife Harriet of adultery with several men and, finding letters from the prince, believed that she too had had an affair with him. The prince had to testify to the subsequent divorce, stating that he had never been alone with Harriet, but that he appeared for only a few minutes and was not questioned by Sir Charles’s lawyer. Fortunately for the prince, it was decided that Harriet was “insane” and should be committed to an asylum, and could not get a divorce. Lady Mordaunt was locked up. She was probably suffering from what we would now call postpartum depression.

But even this case is not comparable: Lady Mordaunt was an adult. Giuffre was a minor when she alleges that Andrew sexually assaulted her. She shows no signs of turning back, and the days when women could be locked up are over.

From Newsnight’s catastrophic interview with Emily Maitlis, in which Andrew did not express sympathy for Epstein’s victims, to arguments that handing over documents to his protection officers did not mean he had been notified, Andrew’s public response to their allegations It has been a vision of law. . Throughout the Newsnight interview, he claimed that he did not know Epstein well, but that he was a good friend of Maxwell, and Epstein attended his social events as his “plus one.” He invited Maxwell and Epstein to parties, including his daughter’s 18th and a party at Windsor Castle where the Queen was present; He is even accused of asking Maxwell to bring women to Buckingham Palace for him. After Maxwell’s conviction for sex trafficking, Andrew’s association with her is a serious problem.

Also Read  Mom says high-risk baby contracting COVID-19 was a 'nightmare'

Ever since Judge Lewis Kaplan rejected Andrew’s attempt to dismiss the sexual abuse case, stories of limitation of damages have emerged. One report suggests that Andrew will sell his chalet in Verbier, in the Swiss Alps, to finance legal fees and any settlements, rather than having his mother pay for it; others suggest that you will settle out of court. Trying to encourage Giuffre to compromise might have been easier if Andrew’s legal team hadn’t chosen to post insults against her, calling a victim of child molestation a “money-hungry sex kitten” in legal documents and accusing her of frivolous and inconsistent claims. And a deal could run into the millions. There is a mortgage on the chalet, so Andrew needs to get more money from somewhere. Sources have explained that Giuffre would also expect an apology.

So Andrew’s legal team, barely earning Giuffre’s affection, has the mother of all battles on their hands to persuade her to agree to a deal. Even if you do, the stain will remain. But if he decides to go to court, Andrew losing his military titles will be the least of his problems. A trial would be a disaster for Andrew and royalty. It would involve lengthy interrogations, statements, possibly including his ex-wife and daughters, and requests for evidence that have thus far not been found, such as records from Andrew’s protection officers on where he was the night Virginia claims she met him. He could refuse to cooperate with the process, but the court would continue to judge in his absence.

Also Read  Finland, Sweden and Norway will eliminate the wolf population | Conservation

Many had made the comparison that Prince Harry had given up his military titles when he stepped back to protect his wife and family, and many military sources expressed sadness at losing him. Prince Harry had no lawsuits against him, no accusations. So why has controversy-haunted royalty still withheld all of their accolades until now? Harry longed for a statement from the royal family at large to back up his concerns for his wife; Andrew was supported by the palace, which issued statements that “emphatically deniedGiuffre’s assertions.

But in quick change, Andrew is now out, no longer a member of “the Firm.” And if the case proceeds and the judge determines that he was guilty of sexual assault on a minor, he will not be found guilty as a member of royalty, but as a private citizen.


www.theguardian.com

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *