Prince Andrew demanded a civil trial for Virginia Giuffre’s claims about Jeffrey Epstein forcing her to have sex three times with him when she was 17 years old.
Prince Andrew and Virginia Giuffre want to paint each other in a “bad light”A battle to “emotionally sway”According to a lawyer, jurors in civil trials are called jurors.
Alan Collins, from Hugh James in Cardiff, stated that the decision was made to go to trial. “high risk”Both Ms Giuffre and the Duke of York.
He stated that it is likely that the legal teams from both sides have made a deal. “tactical”decision to force the other party into settling.
Ms. Giuffre is suing Prince Andrew because she claims that Jeffrey Epstein, a paedophile, forced her to have sex three times with him when she was only 17.
Yesterday, the Duke of York demanded a trial while rejecting Ms Giuffre’s allegations.
Collins represented many victims of Jimmy Savile in the past, according to The Mirror. “Both sides have asked for a jury trial. I assume (they) are doing so tactically thinking that the jury is more likely to be emotionally swayed than a judge.
“Both sides are at risk. It is possible for one party to take a dislike of the other. Virginia Giuffre may think that a jury will be disgusted by the entire miserable and oppressive story, and sympathise with Virginia.
“Prince Andrew might fear ‘guilt’ by association with (Jeffrey) Epstein and (Ghislaine) Maxwell, and so will want to paint Ms Giuffre in a bad light.
“Both sides are at high risk and it is likely tactical to force the other side to settle.”
Mr Collins said Prince Andrew will not be forced to travel to New York for the trial and could appear via video link.
He added: “This is not a case of criminality. Although it is about guilt or innocence in this case, it is not about that.
“It’s about whether Prince A did the wrongs complained of. If the jury find against him then the proverbial will hit the fan and goodness where that will take him.”
He also shared his views on why Prince Andrew’s legal defense had made a ‘consent” defense, despite Ms Giuffre’s claims that he never had sex.
It comes after Andrew’s legal team list “consent”The “doctrine of unclean hands” – which is an allegation that Giuffre has acted unethically related to the accusations – among his defences.
“Giuffre’s alleged causes of action are barred in whole or in part by her own wrongful conduct,”They wrote.
Mr Collins said: “In criminal law children cannot consent to sex. In civil law it is a question of fact.
“What I think Prince Andrew’s lawyers are arguing is that Ms Giuffre’s at the time was consenting to all that was taken place at Epstein’s, and she was involved.
“Therefore she cannot complain many years later that what took place was non-consensual.
“It is difficult for people to grasp that Prince Andrew says nothing has happened. How can he get consent?
Receive the most recent news directly to your inbox Register for the Mirror newsletter
“This is missing the point. The issue is deeper than that and maybe part of the overall strategy to paint her Ms Giuffre in a bad light – a very bad one.”
After Prince Andrew denied a series of allegations about sex abuse made by Ms Giuffre in a US court, Collins has now provided his analysis.