Questions About Prince Andrew's Strange Settlement with Virginia Giuffre
Why was the mutual gag order only one year? Is its approaching end the reason the Prince wants a re-do?
Last March, I wrote about why Prince Andrew might want to settle with Virginia Giuffre and thus avoid going to a public trial. Here’s the transcript of that Q&A with former AUSA for South Florida David S. Weinstein about why he thought Andrew settled.
So, what might have have happened to make the Prince reportedly want to reverse this deal that put him into exile?
I checked in with Weinstein to get his take. I still am waiting to hear from both the Prince’s attorney, Andrew Brettler, and Giuffre’s lawyer, David Boies. And I will let you know when/if I hear.
Meanwhile, some of Weinstein’s points:
Given the impending lift of the mutual gag order, which reportedly only lasts a year from the date of the settlement, Prince Andrew could be going on the offensive ahead of what Giuffre might say in a couple months. Weinstein observes that it is very bizarre to have a settlement with a gag order lasting only one year. We need to ask: Why only one year?
Now that the Queen is dead, and the Jubilee is over, Andrew might no longer care about getting into the muck of a he said/she said trial. He’s already lost his titles and reputation, so one could make the case: What’s he got to lose by opening it all up?
That photograph. If Prince Andrew can prove it wasn’t real (as Ghislaine Maxwell alleged on TV yesterday), that could help him question Giuffre’s prior allegations against him. (They were dropped because of the settlement.) Even if he can’t prove it’s a fake, then it becomes a he said/she said unless Giuffre can prove it is real. If it’s been lost, we may never know for sure.
Andrew could be helped by the recent dismissal of the suit that Giuffre brought against Alan Dershowitz, where she concluded she “may have been mistaken” in identifying Dershowitz as a sexual abuser.
Take a listen to our audio Q&A.