No sweat!

[OwlHoot]

I took her what, 15+ years to get to trial and now she could not hack it despite winning key victories? It wasn't a criminal trial, so she did not even have to prove anything beyond reasonable doubt, and now she folded, for money. ...

It seems she couldn't produce the original or negative of the photo of Andrew standing next to her and Epstein. The photo did look to me a bit potentially doctored and quite posibly fake. If so then maybe she decided the absence of the original might weaken her case, and discretion is the better part of valour so it was now time to cash out.

[AtW]

he's lost everything at the age of 61.

[AtW]

It seems she couldn't produce the original or negative of the photo of Andrew standing next to her and Epstein. The photo did look to me a bit potentially doctored and quite posibly fake. If so then maybe she decided the absence of the original might weaken her case, and discretion is the better part of valour so it was now time to cash out.

In the court of public opinion Andrew looked guilty AF - even if she had lost then she would have had lots of sympathy and money to charity etc, she could not lose basically - unless she settled.

I guess her lawyers were driving this in the first place

[SueEllen]

In the court of public opinion Andrew looked guilty AF - even if she had lost then she would have had lots of sympathy and money to charity etc, she could not lose basically - unless she settled.

I guess her lawyers were driving this in the first place

She didn't lose by settling.

Prince Andrew lost by settling.

The Queen isn't going to live forever, his brother isn't going to bank roll him and he no longer has influence to get money out of gullible foreigners. So he can't pay for the lifestyle he expects as a Prince.

[AtW]

So he can't pay for the lifestyle he expects as a Prince.

I find your lack of faith in good friends disturbing.

[northernladuk]

It seems she couldn't produce the original or negative of the photo of Andrew standing next to her and Epstein. The photo did look to me a bit potentially doctored and quite posibly fake. If so then maybe she decided the absence of the original might weaken her case, and discretion is the better part of valour so it was now time to cash out.

That's my take on it as well.

[SueEllen]

That's my take on it as well.

Would she have got more than £12 Million in Court?

(All the money he got from selling the chalet.)

[tazdevil]

No doubt Andrew is a sleazeball but she was also a courtesan and knew exactly what she was doing albeit a bit naive at the time. Manipulated by a father who approved of her taking the job and now manipulated by partners who approve of her going after the money. Andrew was a sitting duck for this extortion and only has himself to blame. I'd have more respect for her if she went after some of the others in the Epstein set

[saptastic]

There were two payments one to her personally and one charity payment. I suppose it depends who you define justice. So many people have settled claims over the years - footballers, high profile businessman - I guess the point is you never know 100% whether it was true either way - but a court might not bring that out anyway.

[WTFH]

It seems she couldn't produce the original or negative of the photo of Andrew standing next to her and Epstein. The photo did look to me a bit potentially doctored and quite posibly fake. If so then maybe she decided the absence of the original might weaken her case, and discretion is the better part of valour so it was now time to cash out.

Or maybe the rules in the US are similar to the UK - if you turn down an offer of settlement that is considered "reasonable", and then you pursue the case, the court can rule the costs of both sides are paid by you, even if you win the case.

...although that isn't as Express as "the photos are fake, she's not going after all the men she slept with, and oh look, there's Meghan"