Prince Andrew’s lawyers ‘will say he has diplomatic immunity over sex abuse lawsuit’

Prince Andrew’s lawyers may try to get sexual abuse allegations made against him by a sex slave victim of Jeffrey Epstein thrown out of court by claiming he had diplomatic immunity as friends say the royal is ‘cheerful and relaxed’ over the bombshell case and will remain silent.

The Duke of York, who is currently at Balmoral visiting his mother the Queen with his ex-wife Sarah Ferguson, ‘has no intention’ of changing course and is not panicking about Virginia Giuffre’s extraordinary lawsuit launched in New York last week, a friend in London has said.

US lawyer Spencer Kuvin, who represents several of convicted paedophile financier Epstein’s victims, suggested that Andrew’s legal team may claim the duke – who was a trade envoy in 2001, when Ms Giuffre claims he raped and sexually abused her – had diplomatic immunity.

He told the Mirror: ‘Ms Giuffre’s lawyers have huge barriers to overcome to get her lawsuit anywhere near a jury. If the Duke engages in the case at all, his legal team will undoubtedly file a motion to dismiss the complaint on numerous different grounds. For sure, they would argue diplomatic immunity. They would have a strong case.’

A friend told the Sun:  ‘His legal team always expected this and have prepared. They advised the Duke to keep calm and carry on and he is taking their advice. The legal process could go on for years but that’s not his fault. He will respond if required to by law, as he has always said.’ 

Andrew’s lawyers are reportedly frantically trying to avoid the case going to trial in the US over fears that jurors may side with an alleged victim of sexual abuse over him in the MeToo era. While the 61-year-old has firmly denied the claims, those inside the palace believe there could be ‘credibility’ problems with his version of events, according to the Times. 

In the legal claim, lawyers said Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell and the prince had all forced Miss Roberts to have sex with Andrew against her will after she was trafficked to London in 2001. They alleged two other such incidents also took place at Epstein’s mansion in New York and at his private island in the US Virgin Islands, Little Saint James. 

The legal document, filed to a court in New York, said Miss Roberts, now 38 and a married mother-of-three known by her married name Virginia Giuffre, had suffered ‘severe and lasting’ damage.

In a car-crash Newsnight interview in 2019, the prince denied any untoward activity and claimed he was in a Pizza Express in Woking – not in the capital – at the time. He claims to have no recollection of ever meeting Ms Giuffre, despite a widely-shared photo of them posing together that same year. 

Friends have questioned the picture’s authenticity, but no evidence has emerged proving that it is a fake.    

It follows claims from American that Ms Giuffre’s legal team had been astonished by the naivety of Andrew’s tactics and warned his evasive approach was certain to backfire.

There is mounting concern at the Palace too, where the Queen’s courtiers are piling pressure on the Prince to change tack and speak out publicly. The Queen has met with Andrew in the past few days at Balmoral and aides close to the Monarch now fear the silence will damage the Royal Family itself.

Last week, the Mail on Sunday revealed that Andrew was facing renewed sex claims in a New York court. 

The civil lawsuit alleges that Andrew has sex with Ms Giuffre at the Manhattan home of the late financier Jeffrey Epstein and at other locations in 2001, knowing that she had been trafficked by Epstein when she was a 17-year-old minor. 

Ms Giuffre, whose maiden name was Roberts, also claims that Andrew ‘stonewalled’ communications from her lawyer and rejected a request to explore alternative dispute resolution.

If Andrew was hoping the allegations would fade – and that he could resume a place in public life – the fresh legal case has placed him back at the centre of controversy.

Now the Palace fears it will be dragged in too, unless the Queen’s second son makes some attempt to diffuse the mounting tension. The Prince has not spoken publicly in the past week, but in an interview with BBC Two’s Newsnight in 2019, he said he could not remember meeting Ms Giuffre and categorically denied that they had sex.

One well-placed palace insider said: ‘There’s a growing sense that his legal team need to say something, even if it is just to acknowledge that they are working on it. The Duke’s legal team is not doing him or the rest of the family any favours by being so taciturn.’

One source said: ‘The Queen met with Andrew and no doubt asked him, ‘What are your lawyers saying? What’s the advice?”

The source said there was ‘bafflement’ about the strategy of Andrew’s legal team, which includes Gary Bloxsome of the firm Blackfords and advice from Blair Berk, a female lawyer who previously represented Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein.

So far they have refused even to reiterate Andrew’s previous claim that he has no recollection of meeting Ms Giuffre.

One insider said the paranoia within Andrew’s team was such that the lawyers had ‘hunkered down’ and were even ‘blanking’ requests for information from other aides.

The source close to Ms Giuffre’s advisers – headed by heavyweight US litigator David Boies – said of Andrew’s legal team: ‘If I was to give you one word which sums up the attitude from Prince Andrew and his side, it is ‘arrogance’. No one out-bluffs David Boies.

‘We gave them multiple times to respond, to come to the table to discuss this, and they ignored our letters, ignored our calls. They were given multiple opportunities to get together, to start a discussion and avoid any of this becoming public. There was nothing but a wall of silence.’

A preliminary hearing has been set for September 13 in Manhattan.