Dear Gossips, 

Prince Andrew’s lawyers argued in court yesterday that Virginia Roberts Giuffre’s lawsuit against him should be dismissed because of a 2009 settlement between her and Jeffrey Epstein that was unsealed this week. They were trying to make the case that a provision in the settlement releasing “second parties and any other person or entity who could have been included as a potential defendant … from all, and all manner of, action and actions of Virginia Roberts, including state or federal, cause and causes of action” applies to Prince Andrew. 

 

Judge Kaplan did not come to a decision though he promised one soon, but he did seem skeptical, questioning Andrew’s lawyers’ interpretation of the term “potential defendant” and whether or not that 2009 settlement is grounds for dismissing this current lawsuit. 

But also, did Prince Andrew just put his hand up, through his lawyers, and identify himself as a “potential defendant” in a settlement that did not name him, between his friend, the dead rapist pedophile Jeffrey Epstein, and Virginia Giuffre, one of his victims?! This is legal strategy – very expensive legal strategy that’s being funded by Her Majesty the Queen – and technicalities are always a part of the process, I get it, but you know, arguing that Andrew is covered by a settlement between a convicted sex offender and a girl who was sex trafficked by him is, well, it’s certainly a look. 

 

As Marina Hyde wrote in The Guardian yesterday, “Swerving court via a loophole provided by one of the leading international paedos of the age … Well, if that isn’t staying classy, then I really don’t know what is.”

While Judge Kaplan decides whether or not to dismiss Virginia’s case against Prince Andrew, he also “directed that the exchange of potential evidence between lawyers on opposing sides of the case was to proceed as scheduled”. I wonder if any of that potential evidence has to do with Andrew’s defective sweat glands. 

 

You’ll recall, during his now infamous interview with Emily Maitlis for BBC Newsnight in November 2019, Andrew said that Virginia’s accusations couldn’t possibly be true because she called him sweaty but he claims he has a no-sweat medical condition. It was… one of the most bonkers parts of a bonkers AF conversation. As Emily Maitlis wrote in a new piece for BBC about that interview, several of Andrew’s answers during that interview “form a critical part” of Virginia Roberts Giuffre’s case against him. Emily has shown her work before about her preparation for her award-winning work on that episode of her show, but now, in light of all that’s happened since, and particularly given that the lawsuit is front page news, she’s once again giving us some insight about her approach, how she elicited those f-cked up responses from him – that interview is the closest we’ve come to any sort of testimony by Prince Andrew who, you’ll note, despite his promises, did not assist US authorities with their investigation into Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell, and their crimes. It’s worth the read. 

Yours in gossip,

Lainey