5.9k Share this
Sky Roberts blasted the Duke of York for filing legal papers saying her case against him should be thrown out due to ‘her own wrongful conduct’.
He said the Royal was being a ‘coward’ and feared it would lead to claims his then teenage daughter had trafficked women for Jeffrey Epstein.
But he said he does not think Prince Andrew will go to jail following the outcome of his daughter’s case.
It comes as the lawyer representing Giuffre is set to quiz the Duke in London but said he will not require evidence from his ex-wife, daughters or the Queen.
David Boies suggested Andrew will find being questioned under oath ‘a little uncomfortable’ – but held out the possibility a financial deal could be struck.
Ms Giuffre claims in a civil suit she was trafficked by Epstein and forced to have sex with the Royal on three occasions when she was 17.
The Duke last week issued 41 denials, rejecting all allegations of wrongdoing. He stated a further 40 times he ‘lacks sufficient information to admit or deny’ claims.
Sky Roberts (pictured) blasted the Duke of York for filing legal papers saying her case against him should be thrown out due to ‘her own wrongful conduct’
He said the Royal (pictured, with his ex-wife this month) was being a ‘coward’ and feared it would lead to claims his then teenage daughter had trafficked women for Jeffrey Epstein
Ms Giuffre claims in a civil suit she was trafficked by Epstein and forced to have sex with the Royal on three occasions when she was 17
Mr Roberts, 65, a retired maintenance manager, who worked at Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago, told the Sunday Mirror: ‘It’s the coward’s way out to try to blame the victim.’
He continued: ‘It’s ridiculous for him to say that Virginia’s hands are unclean or she has skeletons in her closet, or whatever.’
He said his daughter was trying to financially harm the Duke because there was no other way she could get to him.
He continued: ‘How else are you going to hurt him? You’re going ‘to send him to jail? No. He will be protected, he will never see a jail.’
But Mr Roberts added ‘it’s great’ to see what he called the Queen disowning her son as he stepped back from public life and was stripped of his military titles.
A spokesman for the Duke of York declined to comment on the latest claims in the ongoing saga.
David Boies, 80, one of America’s most renowned attorneys, yesterday suggested Andrew will find the experience of being questioned under oath ‘a little uncomfortable’ – but held out the possibility that a financial deal could be done
Giuffre’s lawyer Mr Boies is preparing to fly to Britain later this year to take a legal deposition from the Duke, which he expects to last ‘a day, or probably two’.
‘I’m going to try to get him to understand that this is not going to be combative,’ he told The Daily Telegraph. ‘Obviously, I’m going to ask him a lot of questions.
‘And although some of the questions may be uncomfortable, I’m not going to be aggressive or in any way offensive to him. I’m going to be respectful.’
Mr Boies is known as the ‘greatest deposition taker’ in America and has secured or won for clients nine settlements of more than a billion dollars.
He represented Presidential candidate Al Gore after the disputed 2000 election and helped change the law in California to allow gay people to marry.
Mr Boies is preparing to fly to Britain later this year to take a legal deposition from the Duke, which he expects to last ‘a day, or probably two’, though he says he probably will not need to speak to Prince Andrew’s wider family
Andrew’s deposition must be taken before a July 14 deadline set by the judge.
Should the case go to court, Mr Boies said he ‘doesn’t think we would need’ the Duchess of York, Princess Beatrice or Princess Eugenie to testify.
He added while conversations Andrew had with the Queen ‘could be used, it’s hard to get at those, because he’s probably not going to admit to them, and we’re not going to depose her’.
The Duke says he has no recollection of ever meeting Ms Giuffre, who now uses her married name Giuffre, and last week said he ‘lacks sufficient information to admit or deny’ whether a famous photograph of him with his arm around her waist in March 2001 ‘exists’.
Mr Boies claimed he had tried to avoid litigation and remains perplexed at the Duke’s legal strategy.
‘He could have said, ‘I didn’t know she was underage.’ He could have said, ‘This was an entirely consensual affair.’
There are a number of things he could have said that would have been hard to attack. But this is incomprehensible.’
Legal experts have widely predicted that Andrew will be forced to settle the case out of court with a financial payment.
While Mr Boies said his client will not want to settle if Andrew continued to deny knowing her and suggesting the 2001 photograph was fake, he did accept that she will consider a financial offer if it was large enough to be ‘a vindication’.
He said: ‘We would be unlikely to settle in a situation in which somebody just handed over a cheque.
‘So if Prince Andrew maintains ‘I’ve never heard of this person’, ‘I don’t know who she is’, ‘The photographs are fake’, then I don’t think we would settle on that basis.
‘That said, if you had a settlement that was large enough to be, in effect, a vindication, then it’s something we would obviously look at.’