The woman says she was forced to have sexual relations with the prince in London, New York and on a private Caribbean island owned by [billionaire Jeffrey] Epstein.
She also claims she was forced to have sex, when a minor, with prominent lawyer and former Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz. . .
The court document, first reported on by Politico Magazine, alleges: “Epstein also sexually trafficked the then-minor Jane Doe (a name used in US legal proceedings for people with anonymity), making her available for sex to politically connected and financially powerful people.
“Epstein’s purposes in ‘lending’ Jane Doe (along with other young girls) to such powerful people were to ingratiate himself with them for business, personal, political, and financial gain, as well as to obtain potential blackmail information.” (Read more from this story HERE)
Underage Sex Trafficker’s “Black Book” Included “A Well-Known Prime Minister,” Many U.S. Politicians
By Christian Gysin. As well as explosive allegations about Prince Andrew, ‘Jane Doe #3’ told the court she was ‘trafficked for sexual purposes’ to a string of other powerful men – including ‘a well-known Prime Minister’.
No clue was given to the identity, but the court documents say Epstein’s ‘lending’ of young girls to prominent international figures – foreign presidents and US politicians and businessmen among them – was to ‘ingratiate’ himself and ‘so that he could potentially blackmail them’. . .
When [Epstein’s “black book”] contents were disclosed three years ago, the book was shown to include contact details for former US President Bill Clinton, ex-secretary of state Henry Kissinger, and Barbara Walters, then one of America’s most influential broadcasters.
Prince Andrew and Sarah Ferguson’s details are there, along with entrepreneur Donald Trump, members of the Kennedy family and former prime minister Tony Blair. There is also an entry for Mr Blair’s former spin doctor Alastair Campbell – but with a Downing Street number, not his personal mobile phone. . .
It has previously been reported that at varying times President Clinton, Prince Andrew, former Israeli prime minister Ehud Barak, New Mexico’s ex-governor Bill Richardson and the former US treasury secretary Larry Summers had all been passengers on Epstein’s fleet of private jets. (Read more about the underage sex allegations HERE)
What is the U.S. Federal Lawsuit All About?
By Daily Mail. The multi-millionaire [Jeffrey Epstein] was convicted of sex offences in 2008 after a plea deal which saw him serve 13 months of an 18 month prison sentence.
But two women who say they were abused by him, known as Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2, said their rights have been violated because they were not consulted before the deal was done and they began suing U.S. prosecutors over their handling of the case six years ago.
Today it was revealed that Jane Doe 3, who has named Prince Andrew, and another woman named as Jane Doe 4, say they have been violated in the same way and want to join the group action. (Read more from this story HERE)
Politico Explains the Lawsuit’s History
By Josh Gerstein. [P]rosecutors never charged anyone besides the investor [Jeffrey Epstein] with involvement in obtaining or using underaged girls for sexual purposes.
The new court filing says this result is in part due to the fact that Epstein’s legal team—which included such heavyweights as former independent counsel and solicitor general Ken Starr, trial lawyer Roy Black, and Dershowitz—negotiated a deal that precluded the feds charging anyone as a co-conspirator.
Lawyers for Jane Doe #3 argue in the new motion that Dershowitz put this language in the agreement to protect himself. . .
Epstein and his lawyers fought hard to prevent records about his plea negotiations from being turned over to victims’ attorneys. However, U.S. District Court Judge Keith Marra ruled last year that the victims are entitled to examine those records to prepare their case against the government.
Epstein, Black and others appealed that decision to the Atlanta-based 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, but it ruled in April of this year that no privilege protects plea negotiations in this sort of dispute. (Read more from this story HERE)