‘Tell us where Andrew will get £12m’: Calls grow for no public money to be used in settlement
Queen ‘personally paid £2m to Virginia Roberts charity’ as part of Andrew’s £12m settlement – as calls grow for full disclosure about where the money to pay-off rape accuser has been found
The Duke of York agreed to an out-of-court settlement with Roberts yesterday, reportedly worth up to £12m Royal aides have previously refused to say whether the agreement will be partly funded by the monarch Reports now claim she will help the Duke, providing she isn’t linked to any personal payment to Miss Roberts
<!–
<!–
<!–<!–
<!–
(function (src, d, tag){
var s = d.createElement(tag), prev = d.getElementsByTagName(tag)[0];
s.src = src;
prev.parentNode.insertBefore(s, prev);
}(“https://www.dailymail.co.uk/static/gunther/1.17.0/async_bundle–.js”, document, “script”));
<!–
DM.loadCSS(“https://www.dailymail.co.uk/static/gunther/gunther-2159/video_bundle–.css”);
<!–
The Queen personally made a £2million to Virginia Roberts’ charity as part of Prince Andrew’s £12m settlement, according to reports – as calls grow for a full disclosure about where the money to pay off his accuser has been found.
Royal aides had earlier refused to say whether the settlement will be partly funded by the monarch, but she is understood to have agreed to help the Duke of York, providing she was not linked to any personal payment to Miss Roberts.
A source told the Mirror: ‘She could not be seen to be making a payment to a victim of sexual assault, who accused her son of being an abuser.
‘But a deal was structured in such a way to arrange a sizeable financial contribution to the settlement by way of a charitable donation instead.’
Furthermore, despite growing pressure for him to be stripped of his titles, Andrew is expected to be allowed to remain as Queen’s Counsellor of State and keep his dukedom and service rank of Vice-Admiral.
It comes as politicians and campaigners have insisted on ‘full transparency’ over whether public money will be involved in the settlement.
Miss Roberts – who brought the lawsuit under her married name Giuffre – has alleged she was forced to have sex with the duke three times when she was 17 under the orders of paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.
The Duke of York agreed to an out-of-court settlement with Miss Roberts, now 38, on Tuesday, weeks after he had vowed to contest her rape claims at a public trial.
In the settlement, there was no admission of liability by Andrew, who has always denied the specific allegations.
Demands for Buckingham Palace to reveal how Prince Andrew (L) will pay for his £12million sexual abuse lawsuit intensified last night after royal aides refused to say whether it will be partly funded by the Queen (R)
Prince Andrew, Virginia Roberts, aged 17, and Ghislaine Maxwell at Ghislaine Maxwell’s townhouse in London, Britain on March 13, 2001
Details of the deal were not made public but it is thought he has agreed to pay up to £12million, including a ‘substantial donation’ to Miss Roberts’s charity in support of victims’ rights.
Last night questions remained about how Andrew would fund the settlement. Proceeds from the sale of his £18million Verbier ski chalet had been earmarked as the most likely source but the deal has yet to go through.
Buckingham Palace refused to deny reports that the Queen would help fund the payout through her private Duchy of Lancaster Estate, which generated £23million last year.
The Royal Family also receives part of its wealth from the taxpayer-funded Sovereign Grant, which is given as a single payment every year by the Government. But that money is given to the Queen to cover the cost of the family’s official duties and would not be used for personal needs.
Former minister Norman Baker last night called on the parliamentary Public Accounts Committee – which has previously looked into the Royal Family’s income – to investigate the matter.
‘If any public money is involved we have a right to know,’ said the ex-Liberal Democrat MP. ‘I don’t think the public wants to see public money used to support the Duke of York.’
Ian Murray, Labour’s Scotland spokesman, called for ‘transparency about where the money’s coming from’. He told BBC News: ‘Prince Andrew has always maintained his innocence but will now not face a court of law to be able to determine whether that was true or not.’ He added the case had left a ‘nasty stain’ on Prince Andrew and the Royal Family and ‘full transparency in terms of the settlement… may go a very, very small way in trying to resolve some of the damage they’ve created’.
Labour’s spokesman for domestic violence and safeguarding Jess Phillips said ‘it is perfectly reasonable for the public to be told if their money has played a part in this settlement’. She added: ‘It would show a change of behaviour from the prince if he entered this phase with total openness and honesty.’
Prince Andrew has agreed to settle a lawsuit filed by Virginia Giuffre, who said she was sexually trafficked to the British royal by the financier Jeffrey Epstein when she was 17. The deal described in a court filing Tuesday, Feb. 15, 2022, in New York avoids a trial that would have brought further embarrassment to the monarchy
Harriet Wistrich, of the Centre for Women’s Justice, said the settlement showed even the most powerful men were not immune from being held to account.
She said: ‘We congratulate Virginia Giuffre for her courage in bringing this claim and sticking with it despite the attacks on her character and credibility.
‘It is, however, important that any funds that go towards the settlement come from Prince Andrew’s personal wealth and are not indirectly paid for by the public.’
Dr Charlotte Proudman, a Cambridge University academic and barrister who specialises in cases of violence against women, said: ‘Not a penny of public money should be spent on this settlement, which is effectively buying a victim’s silence and buying Andrew’s way out of a civil trial.’
Brad Edwards, Miss Roberts’s former lawyer, said: ‘This settlement… is a testament to the resolve and credibility of Virginia Giuffre.’
Buckingham Palace and a spokesman for Prince Andrew declined to comment.
Meanwhile, Emily Maitlis claimed tonight that Andrew’s statement within his out-of-court settlement appears to contradict the answers he gave in his now-infamous Newsnight interview.
The BBC broadcaster sat down with the Duke of York in Buckingham Palace in 2019 to discuss Miss Giuffre’s claims that she was forced to have sex with Andrew three times when she was 17 under the orders of the late paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.
The prince strongly denied the claims throughout the interview, and continues to even after the agreement which was sensationally struck on Tuesday.
The discussion, in which Andrew made a series of claims – including insisting he couldn’t have been with Miss Giuffre at the time because he was dining at Pizza Express in Woking, and that a medical condition left him unable to sweat – has since gained notoriety and is widely acknowledged to have embarrassed the royals.
Now Ms Maitlis has revealed her own thoughts following Tuesday’s settlement, in which the Duke is set to pay a figure believed to be around £12m.
Emily Maitlis claimed tonight that Prince Andrew’s statement within his out-of-court settlement with Virginia Giuffre does not deal with the answers he gave in his now-infamous Newsnight interview
The BBC broadcaster sat down with the Duke of York in Buckingham Palace in 2019 to discuss Miss Giuffre’s claims that she was forced to have sex with Andrew, allegations he continues to deny
Writing for the BBC, she said: ‘At the heart of the settlement is the biggest question of all: why is a Prince who told me he had ‘no recollection of ever meeting this lady’ now paying her what we understand to be upwards of £10m?
‘I distinctly remember putting Virginia Giuffre’s accusations to him directly: ‘She says she met you in 2001, she dined with you, danced with you, you bought her drinks in Tramp nightclub and she went on to have sex with you in a house in Belgravia.’
‘And I have the Prince’s reply in front of me now. Three words only: ‘It didn’t happen.’
‘There are only three possible explanations then for the settlement: either he was lying in that response – and remembered her well; or he genuinely had no recollection – and was adamant they hadn’t met – only for his memory subsequently to be jogged; or that he maintains his innocence, but feels the weight of legal and public opinion against him now make settling the easier option, albeit without accepting any liability.’
Ms Maitlis went on to clarify that it was not her place to declare which was true, but pointed to the careful wording of the settlement statement, which she said ‘put distance between an acknowledgement of Giuffre’s pain – and any responsibility he may or may not have had for it’.
She also admitted she was ‘journalistically disappointed’ that the case, and the full story, will not be played out in court.
‘There would have been huge satisfaction in the sense of an ending – any ending – that saw the prince make his legal defence so comprehensively,’ she wrote.
It comes as calls intensified today for the financial arrangements of Andrew’s settlement to be revealed as Buckingham Palace again refused to say whether it could be partially funded by the Queen.
His mother is expected to foot some of the bill in a bid to draw a line under it before her much-anticipated Platinum Jubilee celebrations this summer.
But there is anger at how the Queen, 95, has effectively been forced to bail out the ‘disgraced’ Duke, 61, whose modest pension from his time in the Royal Navy is now his only visible income – amid demands for the public to be told who is financing the deal.
Andrew has been dogged by questions over the source of his wealth for years, and is believed to have relied on handouts from the Queen, personal investments and bequests from relatives such as the Queen Mother.
Prince Andrew waves goodbye to a woman he let out the door at Jeffrey Epstein’s New York home in 2010
The Duke of York pictured leaving the famous Chinawhite nightclub in London at around 2am in July 2000
Graham Smith, from anti-monarchy campaign group Republic, insisted taxpayers ‘deserve to know where the money is coming from for a settlement, which we must assume is in the millions, if not tens of millions’.
But the Queen’s Communications Secretary, Donal McCabe, told MailOnline today: ‘We have never commented on the financial arrangements of The Duke’s legal matters and will not be going forward.’
But there is anger at how the Queen has effectively been forced to bail out the ‘disgraced’ Duke of York, 61, whose modest pension from his time in the Royal Navy is now his only visible income – amid calls for the public to be told who is financing the deal.
Sources also pointed out while there will now be a ‘period of silence’ during the Jubilee celebrations when both parties will have to stick to the terms of yesterday’s carefully-worded statement, Mrs Giuffre would then not be stopped from writing a lucrative book telling her story which could hit the shelves in time for Christmas.
Prince Charles was said to have been supported by the Queen in making it clear to Andrew that he had no choice but to settle with Mrs Giuffre, with one source telling MailOnline that Charles had ‘had enough of the situation’ and ‘would have said to Andrew that he needed to get this sorted out as soon as possible’.
A senior Royal Household member told the Standard that Charles and the Queen ‘could not countenance another disastrous appearance by the Duke of York, in light of his BBC interview’, adding: ‘Decisive action was needed. There was little choice. He had to see sense.’
While Andrew is thought to be holed up at his Royal Lodge home in Windsor today, on the other side of the world a box of beers and a bouquet of flowers were being delivered to Mrs Giuffre and her husband Robert’s home in Perth, Australia.
And her father Sky Roberts told the Sun: ‘I knew he would settle out of court. That was a complete bluff. I think Virginia will be happy.’
Meanwhile, despite the settlement, it is feared the scandal could still overshadow poignant Platinum Jubilee celebrations for the UK in the coming months.
Also today, the Metropolitan Police said they have no plans to reopen their own probe into Andrew despite calls for officers to re-examine evidence after the deal.
Royal author Angela Levin told Sky News today: ‘I think that the Queen would have given him a big telling off and said ‘I can’t have this hanging over me for the rest of the year – I don’t want you to spoil my Platinum Jubilee. I’m the only royal who’s lasted 70 years on the throne, and you’ve got to sort it out’.’
She added: ‘I admire the Queen hugely as everybody does, and I don’t want it to spoil anything for her, but I still think this is hanging over the country and the Royal Family and is going to go right through to the end of the year and maybe into next year, and there’s no real way of cutting it off.
‘Obviously that (a ban on Mrs Giuffre saying anything) was something that they could have put in the agreement and they haven’t, and so it implies that there’s a lot she (Mrs Giuffre) wants to say that Andrew will not want to hear.’
The settlement, which was agreed between lawyers in a sensational development yesterday, comes just weeks after Andrew vowed to contest the rape claims by Mrs Giuffre, formerly known as Virginia Roberts, at a public trial.
Mrs Giuffre had alleged she was forced to have sex with the Duke three times when she was 17 under the orders of the late paedophile financier Jeffrey Epstein.
Only last month, she was given the go-ahead to sue Andrew for unspecified damages in a New York civil court.
But despite vowing to fight the claims and repeatedly protesting his innocence, the Prince yesterday agreed to pay a huge sum to settle the case before it ever reaches a jury.
Nearly two-thirds of Britons believe Prince Andrew should lose his Duke of York title after settling US sex assault lawsuit, YouGov poll reveals as Palace says it has NO plans to strip him of it
Nearly two-thirds of Britons believe Prince Andrew should lose his Duke of York title after settling US sex assault lawsuit, a YouGov poll reveals.
The survey, of 2,658 adults in Great Britain today, found some 62 per cent felt he should lose the title, despite Buckingham Palace saying earlier it has no plans to strip him of it.
The poll also revealed 82 per cent of the public thought Andrew should continue to lay low and not return to royal duties any time soon.
A number of locals in the city of York told MailOnline their views today, with an overwhelming majority feeling he should lose the title.
Bernard Oglesbee, 74, said: ‘He should be stripped off his title definitely. He must be be guilty, or why pay all that money out?’
Wife Val, also 74, stormed: ‘He should be stripped of everything. I have never liked him. I always thought he was a waste of space.’
James Green, 65, said: ‘He absolutely should be stripped of all his titles including Duke of York. I don’t think there is any doubt he is guilty. He has put his foot in it good and proper and he only has himself to blame.’
Annie Wells, 85, who is disabled, said: ‘It is a good job he is the Queen’s son. He would be locked up if he was anyone else. The only good thing I can say about him is he did serve with honours in the Falklands. But if ever shows his face in York I will beat him with my stick.’
Josh Savage, 36, said: ‘Nothing has been totally proved yet, one way or another, and he is the Queen’s son. But I think he might lose the title anyway.’
York florist Richard Bothamley added: ‘I think he will lose the title. It has obviously done him a lot of harm. The whole thing is fiasco. I am quite a patriotic person. So I am pleased for the queen the court case has been resolved.
‘But I don’t think he should keep the title. Who would want him? It is not just this woman it was the circle of people he was mixing with. He has done some wonderful work. But you can’t tell me he did not know what was going on.’
It comes as a palace source today told MailOnline the situation regarding his remaining titles ‘remained unchanged’.
They also include that of Vice Admiral in the Royal Navy and the role of Counsellor of State Today, Defence Secretary Ben Wallace said any decisions on his military honorific ‘rests obviously with the Palace’.
Earlier today, Cllr Darryl Smalley, Liberal Democrat executive member of City of York Council, joined Labour MP Rachael Maskell in demanding Andrew abandon his local links.
Fresh scrutiny has been placed on Prince Andrew’s remaining military title – that of Vice Admiral in recognition of his service in the Navy
Mr Wallace was asked today if the Duke of York should be allowed to represent the military.
He told Sky News: ‘Well I don’t think he represents any of them at the moment,
‘I think the Palace took a decision that those titles were to be removed from him, so I think he is effectively acting now as a private citizen in so far as both addressing the challenges and the allegations.
‘There’s been a, obviously, a payment and I think that is where he currently remains, that the decision on titles rests obviously with the Palace in the future, but I think it’s been pretty clear that this settlement is a recognition that he wants to bring this to a close and also recognise as his statement says the suffering and the challenges that the victims have been through as a result of their allegations and their stand against the exploitation by [Jeffrey] Epstein.’
Rachael Maskell, MP for York Central, has called on Andrew to withdraw his Duke of York title to ‘show respect’ for its people.
Cllr Darryl Smalley, Liberal Democrat executive member for culture, leisure & communities at City of York Council, agreed.
He told York Mix: ‘Having been stripped of his military roles and royal patronages by the Queen, this should be the end of his direct link with our great city.
‘York’s unique connection to the Crown and the monarch is an important part of our city’s legacy, history and a great source of pride.’
Today, Ben Wallace said any decisions on titles ‘rests obviously with the Palace in the future’
Meanwhile, Ms Maskell welcomed the Duke of York’s pledge to donate money to Mrs Giuffre’s charity which supports victims’ rights, but said his relationship with disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein had caused ‘deep hurt and embarrassment’ to York residents.
The MP’s calls comes after Prince Andrew today settled the sexual abuse lawsuit with Virginia Giuffre after he agreed an undisclosed deal said to be worth £12million with his accuser without admitting her accusations.
Prince Andrew at York Racecourse to open the new weighing room in May 2015
The monarch is expected to foot part of the bill for her son’s settlement in a bid to draw a line under it before her much-anticipated Platinum Jubilee celebrations this summer.
But there is anger at how the Queen, 95, has effectively been forced to bail out the ‘disgraced’ Duke of York, 61, whose modest pension from his time in the Royal Navy is now his only visible income – amid calls for the public to be told who is financing the deal.
Sources also pointed out that while there will now be a ‘period of silence’ during the Jubilee celebrations when both parties will have to stick to the terms of yesterday’s carefully-worded statement, Mrs Giuffre would then not be stopped from writing a lucrative book telling her story which could hit the shelves in time for Christmas.
Prince Charles was said to have been supported by the Queen in making it clear to Andrew that he had no choice but to settle with Mrs Giuffre, with one source telling MailOnline that Charles had ‘had enough of the situation’ and ‘would have said to Andrew that he needed to get this sorted out as soon as possible’.
Rachael Maskell, who represents York Central, said the royal’s relationship with disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein had caused ‘deep hurt and embarrassment’ to York residents
A senior Royal Household member told the Standard that Charles and the Queen ‘could not countenance another disastrous appearance by the Duke of York, in light of his BBC interview’, adding: ‘Decisive action was needed. There was little choice. He had to see sense.’
While Andrew is thought to be holed up at his Royal Lodge home in Windsor today, on the other side of the world a box of beers and a bouquet of flowers were being delivered to Mrs Giuffre and her husband Robert’s home in Perth, Australia.
And her father Sky Roberts told the Sun: ‘I knew he would settle out of court. That was a complete bluff. I think Virginia will be happy.’
Meanwhile, despite the settlement, it is feared that the scandal could still overshadow poignant Platinum Jubilee celebrations for the UK in the coming months. Also today, the Metropolitan Police said they have no plans to reopen their own probe into Andrew despite calls for officers to re-examine evidence after the deal.
Royal author Angela Levin told Sky News today: ‘I think that the Queen would have given him a big telling off and said ‘I can’t have this hanging over me for the rest of the year – I don’t want you to spoil my Platinum Jubilee. I’m the only royal who’s lasted 70 years on the throne, and you’ve got to sort it out’.’
She added: ‘I admire the Queen hugely as everybody does, and I don’t want it to spoil anything for her, but I still think this is hanging over the country and the Royal Family and is going to go right through to the end of the year and maybe into next year, and there’s no real way of cutting it off.
‘Obviously that (a ban on Mrs Giuffre saying anything) was something that they could have put in the agreement and they haven’t, and so it implies that there’s a lot she (Mrs Giuffre) wants to say that Andrew will not want to hear.’
The settlement, which was agreed between lawyers in a sensational development yesterday, comes just weeks after Andrew vowed to contest the rape claims by Mrs Giuffre, formerly known as Virginia Roberts, at a public trial.
Mrs Giuffre had alleged she was forced to have sex with the duke three times when she was 17 under the orders of the late paedophile financier Jeffrey Epstein.
Only last month, she was given the go-ahead to sue Andrew for unspecified damages in a New York civil court. But despite vowing to fight the claims and repeatedly protesting his innocence, the prince yesterday agreed to pay a huge sum to settle the case before it ever reaches a jury.