Prince Andrew’s legal professionals wish to query husband and psychologist of his accuser

Prince Andrew’s legal professionals wish to query husband and psychologist of his accuser

Up to date 24 minutes in the past

LAWYES FOR PRINCE Andrew wish to query his accuser’s husband and her psychologist as a part of his civil intercourse case.

Witness accounts are being sought from Virginia Giuffre’s companion Robert Giuffre and Dr Judith Lightfoot, in response to court docket paperwork.

Each Robert Giuffre and Lightfoot are residents of Australia and can be requested to be examined below oath, both in individual or by video-link.

The authorized requests come after the information earlier this week {that a} decide had thrown out a movement by Andrew’s legal professionals to dismiss the case, ruling it could possibly go to trial.

In not too long ago revealed paperwork, legal professionals for Queen Elizabeth’s son argue that Giuffre “could undergo from false reminiscences”, and state that Lightfoot needs to be examined on “concept of false reminiscences” amongst different matters together with issues mentioned throughout their periods and any prescriptions she wrote for Andrew’s accuser.

In addition they want to be allowed to examine paperwork together with the physician’s notes from all periods with Giuffre.

In the meantime, the legal professionals need Robert Giuffre to be questioned on a spread of areas together with the circumstances below which he met his now spouse round 2002 and the Giuffre family funds.

Attorneys need testimony to be obtained from the witnesses by 29 April this yr “or as quickly thereafter as is feasible”.

The trial is scheduled to happen between September and December.

Andrew’s legal professionals have requested that the US court docket points letters to the Central Authority of Australia for his or her help in acquiring the testimony.

Witness accounts

The requests from the duke’s legal professionals observe comparable requests from Giuffre’s authorized representatives.

Her crew is in search of witness accounts from Andrew’s former equerry Robert Olney and a lady referred to as Shukri Walker, who claims to have seen the royal in London’s Tramp nightclub.

Giuffre is requesting testimony from Andrew’s former equerry Robert Olney and a lady referred to as Shukri Walker.

Paperwork submitted by Giuffre’s authorized crew say that Olney’s identify seems in Jeffrey Epstein’s telephone guide below “Duke of York”.

They are saying this implies it’s probably Olney has related details about Andrew’s journey to and from Epstein’s properties throughout the related interval.

The paperwork say Walker has said publicly within the press that she was a witness to Andrew’s presence at Tramp throughout the related time interval with a younger girl who could have been Giuffre.

“Ms Walker has due to this fact said herself that she is a possible witness, and would thus be related to this dispute as a result of plaintiff contends that defendant abused her in London after visiting Tramp collectively, whereas defendant denies being at Tramp on the night time in query or having ever met Plaintiff,” the paperwork say.

Giuffre is suing Andrew within the US for allegedly sexually assaulting her when she was a teen and claims she was trafficked by Andrew’s buddy, convicted intercourse offender Epstein, to have intercourse with the duke when she was 17 and a minor below US legislation.

The duke has strenuously denied the allegations.

#Open journalism

No information is unhealthy information
Help The Journal

Your contributions will assist us proceed
to ship the tales which are vital to you

Help us now

Giuffre claims Andrew had intercourse along with her in opposition to her will at Maxwell’s London residence and at Epstein’s mansion on the Higher East Facet of Manhattan.

The duke can be alleged to have abused Giuffre on one other event throughout a go to to Epstein’s personal island, Little St James.

The fallout from Andrew’s civil intercourse case continued on Friday as he confronted calls to pay for his personal safety and lose his dukedom.

Criticism of Andrew is mounting after the Queen stripped him of his remaining royal patronages and honorary army roles because the monarchy distanced itself from the duke forward of probably damaging developments in his lawsuit.

Prince Charles didn’t reply when questioned concerning the intercourse scandal which has engulfed his brother, throughout a go to to the north east of Scotland to satisfy individuals who helped within the clear-up operation after Storm Arwen.

Charles was concerned within the royal household discussions with the Queen and Prince William that resulted in Andrew shedding his army roles, patronages and dropping his HRH type.

However when he arrived at Haddo Home and Nation Park, the inheritor to the British throne didn’t remark when a broadcaster from Sky Information stated: “Your Royal Highness, can I ask you your view in your brother’s place, Prince Andrew? How do you view it?”

Giuffre, reacting publicly to this week’s court docket ruling enabling her civil intercourse case in opposition to Andrew to proceed to trial, tweeted she has the chance to “expose the reality”, including: “My objective has all the time been to point out that the wealthy and highly effective aren’t above the legislation & should be held accountable.”

A spokesperson for Andrew declined to touch upon the newly launched authorized paperwork.

A supply near the duke has stated: “It is a marathon not a dash and the duke will proceed to defend himself in opposition to these claims.”

doc.area = “”;

window.on_front = false;
window.login_expires = 1800023377;
window.users_token = ”;

window.fbAsyncInit = perform() {
FB.init({appId: “116141121768215”, standing: true, cookie: true,
xfbml: true});
if(typeof sync_with_server != ‘undefined’)
var js, id = ‘facebook-jssdk’; if (d.getElementById(id)) {return;}
js = d.createElement(‘script’); = id; js.async = true;
js.src = “https://join.fb.internet/en_US/all.js”;
window.email_permission = false;
window.share_permission = false;
var jrnl_social_window = null;
perform jrnl_social_login(service, submit_comment, callback) {
var hyperlink = ”;
if(service == ‘twitter’)
hyperlink = “”;
hyperlink = hyperlink + “&remark=1”;
else if(callback
&& callback.size > 0
hyperlink = hyperlink + “?cb=” + callback;
else if(service == ‘fb’)
// Fb hyperlink is a bit messier – must bounce by way of popup
hyperlink = “” + get_fb_perm_string() + “%26redirect_uripercent3Dhttpspercent3Apercent2Fpercent2Fwww.thejournal.iepercent2Futilspercent2Floginpercent2Ffacebookpercent2F”;
// Are we submitting after log-in?
hyperlink = hyperlink + “?remark=1”;
else if(callback
&& callback.size > 0
hyperlink = hyperlink + “?cb=” + callback;

if ( jrnl_social_window != null && !jrnl_social_window.closed )

jrnl_social_window =

return false;

Supply hyperlink

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.