Prince Andrew has officially denied to the court a catalogue of sex abuse brought by his accuser Virginia Giuffre.
The Duke of York’s legal team filed court documents in New York today, stating he “hereby demands a trial by jury on all causes of action asserted in the complaint”.
His lawyers state: “Assuming, without admitting, that Giuffre has suffered any injury or damage, Giuffre and/or others, who are not Prince Andrew, contributed in whole or in part to the alleged damage.”
They go on to say her “claims are barred by the doctrine of consent” and are “barred in whole or in part by her own wrongful conduct and the doctrine of unclean hands.”
In an 11-page response to her lawsuit today, the Duke of York repeatedly states “lacks sufficient information to admit or deny” most of her information.
The Prince refutes her major claim of “sexual abuse” and “rape” when she was “under the age of 18 years old.”
He admits to befriending paedophile Jeffrey Epstein but denied he was ever a close pal of convicted sex offender Ghislaine Maxwell.
The Duke, 61, said it was not true he was “a frequent guest in Epstein’s various homes around the world, including New York City where he sexually abused Plaintiff (Giuffre) at Epstein and Maxwell’s invitation when she was a minor.
He also “disputes that Giuffre is domiciled in the State of the States” adding “on that basis (he) denies the Colorado” she is a citizen of the States.
Andrew’s legal want Ms Giuffre’s case dismissed claiming she has no right to bring the lawsuit in New York as neither parties are resident of the US.
In a move to dismiss the case his lawyer, Andrew Brettler tells the court: “Giuffre’s Complaint should be dismissed because this court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over the action, due to Giuffre’s improper assertion of jurisdiction notwithstanding that she is a permanent resident of Australia and not a domiciliary of Colorado.”
Of the 12 “factual facts” his accuser’s legal team made in their September filing, the royal tells the court he “lacks sufficient information to admit or deny the” to all of them.
The “factual” details Epstein and Maxwell’s criminal enterprise and how they managed to abused you girls.
The Prince’s legal team again try to have the case thrown out over a 2009 deal Ms Guiffre signed with Epstein saying she would not pursue other “potential defendants”.
His lawyer’s write: “Giuffre, through her own actions, inactions, and other conduct – including, without limitation, entering into the 2009 Release Agreement with Epstein containing a broad third-party release of her claims against Prince Andrew and others – waived the claims now asserted in the Complaint.”
If the case is not thrown out the papers state “Prince Andrew hereby demands a trial by jury on all causes of action asserted in the Complaint.
The Duke of York’s motion was filed after he failed to dismiss the American’s case earlier this month.
Giuffre, 38, has sued Andrew using New York’s Child Victims Act (CVA) that allowed those abused to sue their attackers.
In 2019, lawmakers introduced a “look-back window” that gave victims of decades-old abuse two years to file civil claims by August 14, 2021, even if the statute of limitations had expired.
The deadline for claims was later extended due to Covid by then New York Governor Andrew Cuomo.
Mum-of-three Ms Giuffre, who lives in western Australia, filed the lawsuit on August 9, 2021 – just five days before the window closed.
She claims in 2001, she was trafficked by billionaire Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell to have sex with the Duke in London when she was 17, a minor in US law.
Ms Giuffre also alleges she was forced to have sex with the royal at Epstein’s home in New York and the US Virgin Islands.
The mum-of-three is suing Andrew for unspecified damages, which US lawyers say could “easily” be in excess of £14 million if she is successful.
The Duke’s response to Ms Guiffre’s claims came as Ghislaine Maxwell’s brother, Ian, launched an astonishing attack on Andrew’s accuser.
Discussing the conviction of his sister, who is a friend of the Duke, for procuring, grooming and trafficking girls in New York last month, he hit out alleging she could not be related on as her testimony changes.
He claimed it was why she wasn’t called to give evidence in his sister’s trial although she was available.
Mr Maxwell said: “Whatever Giuffre is saying, why didn’t the police select her, the most vociferous, the most basic accuser, for Ghislaine’s trial? Giuffre was not selected in the trial, because her testimony, whether she has spoken on to oath in defamation hearings or something, has changed, consistently changed about Prince Andrew, about my sister, and so on.
US District Court – Southern Dis)
“Like the allegation about ‘Prince Andrew and her in New Mexico’ in some earlier deposition has vanished.”
He went on to talk about the infamous picture of Andrew standing with his arm around Ms Giuffre’s waist taken in March 2001 while inside his sister’s London home.
“It’s her home for sure,” he told Italian newspaper, Repubblica.
“There’s no question about that. But you have to take two views on this. If the picture is genuine, then they have clearly met. But no original has ever been produced. It’s a photograph that’s real. And even if it’s a fake, For whatever purposes, what does it prove? It proves they met. Okay.
“ It proves they met 25 years ago. Big deal. Does it show her f***ing him? I don’t think so.
“Does it show sexual activity? No, it doesn’t. So it’s probative of nothing. It’s suggestive possibly that something could go on to happen or might have happened. We don’t know what it is.”