Home  Forums |
|
|
|
|
Topic History of: The worm turns..
Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)
|
hedda |
Jo wrote:
hedda wrote:
Of course I haven't a clue what went on or what is the truth but have always had a gut feeling the Roberts/ Guiffe allegations will end in tears..for her.
If Giuffre does get the speculated multimillion payout from Prince Andrew, that and her other wealth such as her reported $1.9 million house might make her sueable herself.
I don't see how she can get any money from Andrew.
(unless he has a US bank account..doubtful)
No US civil court result applies in the UK. If she won she'd then have to sue all over again in a UK court..a very different matter. She won;t find some ambulance chasing UK lawyer to take it on with huge money up front.
This matter can go on for years.
Nearly every US civil court case ends up by being settled but I cannot see Andrew settling..why would he?
If he settled (as ignorant UK tabloids imply on no proof) he would get all the flack anyway.
On the downside if it actually goes to court the claimant, with other Epstein victims speaking up, may very well find herself investigated by the FBI for trafficking.
She's rolled the dice on this but she chose the wrong person to sue (her Dershowitz claims have died a death)
Repeat..the Goldman family got a $60M award form OJ Simpson over 20 years ago. They've never got a penny. |
|
Jo |
hedda wrote:
Of course I haven't a clue what went on or what is the truth but have always had a gut feeling the Roberts/ Guiffe allegations will end in tears..for her.
If Giuffre does get the speculated multimillion payout from Prince Andrew, that and her other wealth such as her reported $1.9 million house might make her sueable herself. |
|
Wyot |
Yep Hedda but the line on Andrew just mirrors the other half of the classic story you and others push here and elsewhere: that Giuffre is a gold-digging slag.
Same thing. May as well be an opinion piece by Hedda et al in The Mail on Sunday today entitled:
"Giuffre is a fake on the make and a Prince would never bat an eyelid at her; but Andrew does have a couple of questions to answer..." |
|
hedda |
I haven't read the latest claims by an alleged Epstein victim re that Andrew accuser but I finally read Sarah Vine's piece on it.
Of course I haven't a clue what went on or what is the truth but have always had a gut feeling the Roberts/ Guiffe allegations will end in tears..for her.
This whole case becomes more complicated by the minute with the jury matter now possibly causing Maxwell's conviction to be derailed.
And still the more fascinating story is not being told..the source of Epstein's wealth.
## Note even Vine must fall into line and state the only current acceptable description of Prince Andrew:
Oaf ??? .. he fought bravely in the Falklands War as his comrades attest
pompous ?? ..no more than any royal)
entitled? .. in what way? He did actually work very hard promoting British trade interests abroad.
If you are ancient like me you would recall a time when Prince Andrew was treated favorably by the very same tabloids for his military career and as "randy Andy" because of his long affair with Koo Stark & often pretty dates but a lifestyle no more sensational than Charles, Harry or William.
As usual Britain's media re-writes history (it's own)
Prince Andrew is a pompous, entitled oaf - but his accuser Virginia Roberts has questions to answer too, writes SARAH VINE
www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-10382...ions-answer-too.html |
|
|
|
