we have heard this document was crafted to speak to epstein and two people employed by him, who worked for him, people like ghislaine maxwell, who could have been included as a defendant in the lawsuit. and it will then be up to thejudge to decide lawsuit. and it will then be up to the judge to decide whether this document has a bearing on anyone outside of epstein and those people directly connected to him. rgreat outside of epstein and those people directly connected to him. directly connected to him. great to talk to you- directly connected to him. great to talk to you. thank directly connected to him. great to talk to you. thank you directly connected to him. great to talk to you. thank you very i directly connected to him. great to talk to you. thank you very much. | talk to you. thank you very much. the former us attorney for south florida. john, it is all about this hairdo. new year, new look, perhaps? do you fancy it? apparently it takes four and a half hours. there is a
anyone else who could have been a potential defendant in her case against him. so while i understand the reason that the prince is using this document, i believe it will get little traction from the district courtjudge. i5 little traction from the district court judge- little traction from the district court ude. , ., , , court udge. is there a possibility the courtjudge. is there a possibility the document courtjudge. is there a possibility the document could courtjudge. is there a possibility the document could be courtjudge. is there a possibility the document could be thrown i courtjudge. is there a possibility. the document could be thrown out courtjudge. is there a possibility i the document could be thrown out in the document could be thrown out in the uk or in the us? the the document could be thrown out in the uk or in the us? the uk or in the us? the document exists between the uk or in the us? the document exists between virginia the uk or in the us? the docume
settlement agreement. they were not thought of in this settlement agreement, so they are grasping at straws, trying to get a benefit from a document entered into between people. j a document entered into between eole. , . , people. iwill ust correctly, i think you people. iwill ust correctly, i think you are i people. iwilljust correctly, i think you are talking i people. iwilljust correctly, i think you are talking about i people. iwilljust correctly, i. think you are talking about prince andrew. that is correct. this document mentions first parties and other possible defendants. what do those terms mean and who else could they be describing? it those terms mean and who else could they be describing? they be describing? it mentions first parties they be describing? it mentions first parties and they be describing? it mentions first parties and second i they be describing? it mentions first parties and second parties. first party is virginia giuffre and anyone connected with
in the federal case mentioned against him do not include prince william. prince andrew. i am sorry. the duke of york. let s go with that. prince andrew, the duke of york. it does not mention him, it does not mention anything connected to the duke of york. so he is attempting to shoehorn himself into this agreement entered into between virginia giuffre and epstein by saying he somehow could have been another defendant. nobody had thought of including him in a defendant as a defendant in that lawsuit at that time. defendant as a defendant in that lawsuit at that time. lawsuit at that time. what can we exect to lawsuit at that time. what can we exoect to hear lawsuit at that time. what can we expect to hear in lawsuit at that time. what can we expect to hear in legal lawsuit at that time. what can we j expect to hear in legal arguments lawsuit at that time. what can we i expect to hear in legal arguments in new york later? i expect to hear in legal arguments in new york later?
south, rain clearing with some sunshine and a brisk wind. although the details throughout the programme. it s tuesday the 4th of january. our main story. prince andrew s legal team will today try to convince a new yorkjudge to throw out a civil case brought by a woman who accuses him of sexually assaulting her when she was 17. the duke has consistently denied the claims. it follows the release of a document that shows virginia giuffre was paid $500,000 in exchange for committing not to sue anyone connected to the sex offenderjeffrey epstein. here s our legal correspondent dominic casciani. a woman making the gravest of allegations. the unprecedented defendant, a prince of the realm. and now, a day of critical court hearings for both virginia giuffre and the duke of york. she says she was sexually exploited by the man on the right, jeffrey epstein. ms giuffre, then known as roberts, said epstein coerced the then teenager into abuse by prince andrew. alleged events 20 years ago,