YOU DETAILS ABOUT PRINCE ANDREWS
INVOLVEMENT WITH JEFFREY
EPSTEIN’S UNDERAGED SEX RING.
SUIT IN CIVIL COURT BY VIRGINIA
ALLEGES HE RAPED HER WHEN SHE
WAS UNDER 18 NOW A SECRET
AGREEMENT FROM 2009 HAS BEEN
MADE PUBLIC ROAD VIRGINIA WAS
PAID $500,000 BY THE JEFFREY
EPSTEIN TO NOT TAKE LEGAL ACTION
AGAINST ANYONE WHO COULD BE
DESCRIBED AS A POTENTIAL
DEFENDANT RELATED TO HIM.
ANDREW’S LEGAL TEAM SAID THE
PAYOFF SHOULD RELIEVE HIM FROM
LIABILITY AS ONE OF THE
POTENTIAL DEFENDANT.
DOES THAT MEAN PRINCE ANDREW MAY
NEVER FACE A JUDGE?
HER TO DISCUSS, DEFENSE ATTORNEY
AND FROM PROSECUTOR, WELCOME
BACK TO THE SHOW.
>> MY PLEASURE.
KENNEDY: PEOPLE WANT TO SEE SOMEONE PAY FOR THE CRIMES.
SOMEONE PAY FOR THE CRIMES.
OBVIOUSLY JEFFREY EPSTEIN WAS
GUILTY, GHISLAINE MAXWELL WAS
GUILTY, THEY BOTH TRAFFICKED THE
GIRLS TO OTHER PEOPLE, THEY WANT
TO SEE SOMEONE PAY FOR AND
PRINCE ANDREW IS THE CLOSEST
THING BUT WHAT DOES THE LEGAL
DOCUMENT SAY ABOUT WHETHER OR
NOT HE COULD FACE PROSECUTION OR
CIVIL PENALTY?
>> WHILE THE LANGUAGE IS PRETTY
CLEAR.
HIS HAS ANYONE WHO COULD HAVE
BEEN A POTENTIAL DEFENDANT SHE
SHALL NOT BRING A LAWSUIT
AGAINST THEM.
WELL, DOES NOT INCLUDE HIM?
I DON’T WANT IT TO AND NEITHER
DO YOU BECAUSE IF HE DID DO
THESE HORRIBLE THINGS, WE WANT
HIM TO PAY SO LET’S LOOK AT THE
LANGUAGE.
IN HER COMPLAINT SHE REFERENCES
EPSTEIN’S PEERS, INCLUDING
POLITICIANS, ACADEMIA AND
SPECIFICALLY ROYALTY DID THESE
HORRIBLE THINGS SO WHO IS SHE
REFERRING TO?
IF WE ARE BEING HONEST, YOU KNOW
SHE’S REFERRING TO PRINCE ANDREW
SO HOW THEN DOES A COURT NOT
THINK THAT WAS THE BASIS OF THE
BARGAIN INCLUDED IN THE $500,000
SETTLEMENT?
KENNEDY: SHE’S ALSO ASKING FOR
HIS MEDICAL RECORDS BECAUSE HE
HAD A HORRIBLY BOTCHED INTERVIEW
ON BRITISH TELEVISION WHERE HE
SAID I’VE NEVER MET THE GIRL,
THE PICTURE WAS PHOTOSHOPPED,
THE PERSON’S HAND ON THE PICTURE
IS READ AND CLEARLY WHEN YOU’RE
TAKING PICTURES AND DEVELOPING
THEM BACK IN THE DAY WHEN HE WAS
ALLEGEDLY TAKING ADVANTAGE OF A
TEEN GIRL WOULD HAVE THE COLOR
DIFFERENCES AND HE SAID HE HAS A
MEDICAL CONDITION HE SUSTAINED
DURING THE WAR, THE COLD WAR
THAT MADE IT IMPOSSIBLE FOR HIM
TO SWEAT SO SHE AND HER LAWYER
SAID SHOW US MEDICAL
DOCUMENTATIONS YOU CANNOT SWEAT
AND SET YOU DON’T GET IT.
NOT YOUR BUSINESS.
>> RIGHT, HE DOESN’T WANT THEM
TO GET ANYTHING.
HE WANTS TO SAY IT’S A MATTER OF
LAW, CUT ME LOOSE. YOU AGREED WITH THIS LANGUAGE.
YOU AGREED WITH THIS LANGUAGE.
THE FLIPSIDE IS HE WASN’T WHO
SHE CONTEMPLATED ONE MADE THE
AGREEMENT.
HE WASN’T EVEN RELATED TO THE
FLORIDA LAWSUIT, HE HAS NOTHING
TO DO WITH FLORIDA SO IT’S A
DIFFERENT JURISDICTION, HE HAS
NOTHING TO DO WITH THAT, HE IS
NOT INCLUDED IN THE LIST OF
DEFENDANT WHO SHE COULD
POTENTIALLY BRING A CLAIM ON
BEHALF OF.
KENNEDY: THAT’S WHAT HER BOYS
ARE SAYING, THERE’S A HEARING
TOMORROW TO DECIDE WHETHER OR
NOT THE CIVIL SUIT GET
DISMISSED, WHAT YOU THINK WILL
HAPPEN THERE?
>> I WAS HOPING HE WOULDN’T ASK
ME BECAUSE I’VE DISCUSSED IT
WITH MY PEERS AND NONE OF US CAN
AGREE.
WE THINK THE PLAIN LANGUAGE IN
THE AGREEMENT WHICH COURTS
GENERALLY LIKE TO ENFORCE, YOU
CAME UP WITH THIS AGREEMENT,
LET’S HONOR THE LANGUAGE SO YOU
THINK THE COURT WOULD SAY OKAY,
WE’RE CUTTING THEM LOOSE BECAUSE
IT CONTEMPLATED BUT I THINK ALSO
I COULD SEE THE JUDGE DOING THE
OPPOSITE STUFF I HAD TO GUESS, I
WOULD SAY THE JUDGE DOES NOT
DISMISS THE CASE.
KENNEDY: WHERE DO WE GO FROM
THERE?
>> DISCOVERY, TRIAL, DEMANDS FOR
THE RECORDS YOU DISCUSSED, EVERYWHERE HE DOESN’T WANT TO GO
EVERYWHERE HE DOESN’T WANT TO GO
WHICH IS WHY THAN I COULD SEE A
SETTLEMENT BEING REACHED SO THIS
DOESN’T BECOME ANY MORE PUBLIC
THAN A HOUSE.
KENNEDY: AND I’M SURE THE QUEEN
IS PUSHING FOR THAT BECAUSE IT’S
ALREADY BEEN VERY DAMAGING AND
EMBARRASSING FOR THE ROYAL
FAMILY, DOES HE HAVE ANY SORT OF
DIPLOMATIC IMMUNITY BECAUSE OF
HIS TITLE?
>> NO AND LET ME TELL YOU,
THERE’S NO PROBLEM WITH THERAPY
DEEP POCKETS BEHIND HIM.
THEY WANT TO PAY THIS OFF.
IF EPSTEIN PAID 500,000, WE KNOW
WHAT THE BALLPARK IS, THAT IS
CHUMP CHANGE FOR THEM SO
SOMETHING TELLS ME THIS WILL BE
RESOLVED, ASSUMING IT DOESN’T
GET DISMISSED.
KENNEDY: HE WANTS THE CROWN
JEWELS.
WE WILL SEE, WE WILL BE WATCHING
TOMORROW TO SEE IF IT DOES GET
DISMISSED.
LIKE YOU SAID, THERE’S LEGAL
ARGUMENT ON BOTH SIDES HERE.
PEOPLE DON’T NECESSARILY LIKE
HIM BUT HE MAY HAVE A DEFENSE
HERE.
THANK YOU SO MUCH.