Latest from Prince Andrew: Duke’s statement ‘incoherent’, says Maitlis

Labour’s Rachael Maskell, who represents York Central, repeated a call made last month, saying Prince Andrew should give up his association with the city out of respect.

She said: “To demonstrate his seriousness in this endeavor and his respect for those affected by abuse and the people of our city, I would ask that his first act of contrition be to confirm his support for the withdrawal of his ducal title.”

Although the parties have settled the case, the agreement is not an admission of guilt on the Duke’s part and he has always vigorously denied the allegations made against him.

While Prince Andrew has been “publicly disgraced”, he “will always have a better life than anyone could dream of”, an accuser of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell has claimed.

“Whatever he lost as a result of this can never be compared to what the victims of Epstein, Maxwell and the men we were trafficked for lost with our lives,” Liz said. Stein. BBC breakfast.

The Duke strongly denies the allegations made against him by Virginia Giuffre in the US case settled this week.

The decision on Prince Andrew’s titles “obviously will be up to the Palace in the future”, said Defense Secretary Ben Wallace.

Asked if the Duke of York should be allowed to represent regiments, he told Sky News: “Well I don’t think he’s representing any at the moment, I think the Palace decided that those titles should be taken away from him, so I think he is effectively now acting as a private citizen insofar as he responds to both challenges and allegations.

“There was, obviously, a payment and I think that’s where it stays now, that the decision on the titles obviously belongs to the Palace in the future, but I think it’s pretty clear that this settlement is an acknowledgment that he wants to put an end to this and also recognize, as his statement says, the suffering and challenges that the victims have gone through as a result of their allegations and their stand against exploitation by Epstein.

Gloria Allred, an American lawyer who has represented several of Jeffrey Epstein’s victims, said Prince Andrew’s settlement with Virginia Giuffre now means that, without a jury trial, the public “will just have to decide who they believe in”.

Speaking to BBC Radio 4 Today programme, Ms Allred said: ‘This case will be dismissed and then everyone will go their own way and they will never end up testifying under oath, at least not in this case, and the public will just have to decide who they believe. .”

She added, “Trials are war, but a settlement means both sides seek peace, and that’s what happened here. There will be peace now, but this case will be remembered for many, many years. »

Suggesting the ‘ship has sailed’ now for Ms Giuffre to say more about the Duke – who has strongly denied her accusations – Ms Allred said Times Radio“Will we now ever know the truth about what Prince Andrew did or didn’t do?

“I guess people will probably believe what they believed before this settlement, and before they heard sworn testimony, because there hasn’t been any so far. At least in this case. The people will come to their own conclusions in the court of public opinion, but that won’t happen in court.”

Yesterday BBC Royal Correspondent Nicholas Witchell suggested the ‘only route back’ to a public role for the Duke could be to support victims of sex trafficking, but wondered if any charities or regiments “would like to be associated with him after all this, for all that there is no admission of responsibility”.

Labor MP Jess Phillips, who works with victims of sex trafficking, also said she did not see how he would be welcome in such a role after the settlement with Virginia Giuffre.

In the statement on the settlement, Prince Andrew pledged “to demonstrate his regret for his association with Epstein by supporting the fight against the evils of sex trafficking and by supporting its victims”.

write for Independent VoicesKathleen N Walsh argues that Prince Andrew’s new statement ‘seems at odds with accusations that his lawyers pressured Virginia Giuffre before the motion to dismiss was dismissed’.

“At the time, they accused Giuffre of fabricating charges for money. There was no sympathy for his position and no mention of other victims of sex trafficking or sexual abuse. “Giuffre has brought this baseless lawsuit against Prince Andrew to obtain another payday at his expense and the expense of his loved ones,” the statement read. “Epstein’s abuse of Giuffre does not justify his public campaign against Prince Andrew.”

“Is this what justice looks like in this reversal? It’s terribly hollow if that’s the case.

Read his reflection in full here:

Here’s more of Defense Secretary Ben Wallace’s reaction this morning to Prince Andrew’s settlement with Virginia Giuffre.

A royal commentator has suggested reports that Prince Andrew will face a £12million payout in his settlement with Virginia Giuffre “may be inflated”.

“Previously the estimates were more like £5m, and it could be that they include legal fees from the Virginia legal team, who could be working pro bono,” David McClure told LBC.

“Secondly, we don’t know for sure that the Queen will bear the full bill. Obviously, if it’s very high – if it’s over £5million – I don’t think Andrew has the money from his own wealth to pay for it. So more than likely, the queen would give him money under these circumstances.

He suggested that “there is precedent for ‘the Queen’ coming to the aid of one of her sons in financial difficulty”, citing claims made by The Telegraph and in a 2007 biography, the Queen lent Prince Charles an unknown sum of money to pay for his divorce settlement from Princess Diana.

The Royal Family must make it clear that the Duke of York’s settlement with Virginia Giuffre is not being paid for with public money, a leading lawyer has claimed.

Mark Stephens, media specialist at the Howard Kennedy law firm, said BBC breakfast“Money is used in three ways. The first part is to pay compensation to Virginia Giuffre. The second is to pay the costs of his lawyers and others.

“And the third is, of course, that she has taken advantage of her profile and a large sum is going to her personal charity to fight for victims of sex trafficking and sexual abuse.

“Now it’s a listed charity – as I suspect it will have to be to get the tax benefits – so we’ll see how much is paid into this account. This, I think, will give a clue to the public.

“But I suspect that long before this is in the public domain, Andrew will need to confirm that the public has not paid for this, as it threatens to have wider implications for the Royal Family.”

Lisa Bloom, an attorney representing a number of Epstein victims, said she and her clients “praise Virginia’s breathtaking courage”, hailing the settlement as a “victory”.

However, Lady Victoria Hervey, who socialized with Prince Andrew in the early 2000s, said she thought the “story was falling apart” in reference to the Virginia Giuffre allegations.

The socialite said: “I hope the Royal Family can now focus on the upcoming Jubilee celebrations and that Prince Andrew can put these false allegations behind him.”