Federal judge strikes 'impertinent' allegations against Prince Andrew and attorney Alan Dershowitz
A federal judge in West Palm Beach, Florida, has struck third-party allegations concerning claimed sexual activities by Prince Andrew and attorney Alan Dershowitz from an ongoing lawsuit against the U.S. government.
Without making any factual finding as to the validity of the allegations, U.S. District Judge Kenneth Marra found that the filed material was “impertinent.” Politico provides a copy of opinion (PDF).
The 2008 case involves a challenge by two unidentified women, known as Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2, to a federal non-prosecution agreement concerning financier Jeffrey Epstein. He took a deal in which he pleaded guilty in Florida state court to procuring an underage girl for prostitution and spent a year in jail. As part of that deal, the feds agreed not to pursue charges, reports Reuters.
In their civil suit against the government, Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 are challenging that non-prosecution pact, invoking the Crime Victims’ Rights Act.
Two other women, Jane Doe #3 and Jane Doe #4, sought to join the CVRA suit as plaintiffs, but Marra denied their motion on Tuesday. They aren’t needed as plaintiffs, the judge said. He pointed out that both women can still be witnesses in the case, to the extent that their testimony is relevant.
Jane Doe #3 made the allegations against Prince Andrew and Dershowitz in her filings seeking to be a plaintiff in the CVRA case. She alleging that Epstein arranged encounters with Prince Andrew and Dershowitz involving forced sex when she was underage, explains Reuters. A media firestorm and strenuous denials resulted.
Dershowitz moved to intervene in the CVRA case to fight the claims made against him by Jane Doe #3, but Marra also denied that motion on Tuesday. The judge used his discretion to strike the allegations made by Jane Doe #3 and said Dershowitz’s motion was hence moot.
“At this juncture in the proceedings, these lurid details are unnecessary to the determination of whether Jane Doe 3 and Jane Doe 4 should be permitted to join Petitioners’claim that the Government violated their rights under the CVRA,” wrote Marra. “The factual details regarding with whom and where the Jane Does engaged in sexual activities are immaterial and impertinent to this central claim (i.e., that they were known victims of Mr. Epstein and the Government owed them CVRA duties), especially considering that these details involve non-parties who are not related to the respondent Government. These unnecessary details shall be stricken.”
Related coverage:
ABAJournal.com: “Sued for defamation by lawyers he criticized in civil rights case, Dershowitz says they made his day”
